In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: batman-adv: fix error handling
Syzbot reported ODEBUG warning in batadv_nc_mesh_free(). The problem was
in wrong error handling in batadv_mesh_init().
Before this patch batadv_mesh_init() was calling batadv_mesh_free() in case
of any batadv_*_init() calls failure. This approach may work well, when
there is some kind of indicator, which can tell which parts of batadv are
initialized; but there isn't any.
All written above lead to cleaning up uninitialized fields. Even if we hide
ODEBUG warning by initializing bat_priv->nc.work, syzbot was able to hit
GPF in batadv_nc_purge_paths(), because hash pointer in still NULL. [1]
To fix these bugs we can unwind batadv_*_init() calls one by one.
It is good approach for 2 reasons: 1) It fixes bugs on error handling
path 2) It improves the performance, since we won't call unneeded
batadv_*_free() functions.
So, this patch makes all batadv_*_init() clean up all allocated memory
before returning with an error to no call correspoing batadv_*_free()
and open-codes batadv_mesh_free() with proper order to avoid touching
uninitialized fields.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.7% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-25). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it