In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
seg6: fix the iif in the IPv6 socket control block
When an IPv4 packet is received, the ip_rcv_core(...) sets the receiving
interface index into the IPv4 socket control block (v5.16-rc4,
net/ipv4/ip_input.c line 510):
IPCB(skb)->iif = skb->skb_iif;
If that IPv4 packet is meant to be encapsulated in an outer IPv6+SRH
header, the seg6_do_srh_encap(...) performs the required encapsulation.
In this case, the seg6_do_srh_encap function clears the IPv6 socket control
block (v5.16-rc4 net/ipv6/seg6_iptunnel.c line 163):
memset(IP6CB(skb), 0, sizeof(*IP6CB(skb)));
The memset(...) was introduced in commit ef489749aae5 ("ipv6: sr: clear
IP6CB(skb) on SRH ip4ip6 encapsulation") a long time ago (2019-01-29).
Since the IPv6 socket control block and the IPv4 socket control block share
the same memory area (skb->cb), the receiving interface index info is lost
(IP6CB(skb)->iif is set to zero).
As a side effect, that condition triggers a NULL pointer dereference if
commit 0857d6f8c759 ("ipv6: When forwarding count rx stats on the orig
netdev") is applied.
To fix that issue, we set the IP6CB(skb)->iif with the index of the
receiving interface once again.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v3 · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- 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