In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm/slub: fix to return errno if kmalloc() fails
In create_unique_id(), kmalloc(, GFP_KERNEL) can fail due to
out-of-memory, if it fails, return errno correctly rather than
triggering panic via BUG_ON();
kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:5893!
Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Call trace:
sysfs_slab_add+0x258/0x260 mm/slub.c:5973
__kmem_cache_create+0x60/0x118 mm/slub.c:4899
create_cache mm/slab_common.c:229 [inline]
kmem_cache_create_usercopy+0x19c/0x31c mm/slab_common.c:335
kmem_cache_create+0x1c/0x28 mm/slab_common.c:390
f2fs_kmem_cache_create fs/f2fs/f2fs.h:2766 [inline]
f2fs_init_xattr_caches+0x78/0xb4 fs/f2fs/xattr.c:808
f2fs_fill_super+0x1050/0x1e0c fs/f2fs/super.c:4149
mount_bdev+0x1b8/0x210 fs/super.c:1400
f2fs_mount+0x44/0x58 fs/f2fs/super.c:4512
legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x74 fs/fs_context.c:610
vfs_get_tree+0x40/0x140 fs/super.c:1530
do_new_mount+0x1dc/0x4e4 fs/namespace.c:3040
path_mount+0x358/0x914 fs/namespace.c:3370
do_mount fs/namespace.c:3383 [inline]
__do_sys_mount fs/namespace.c:3591 [inline]
__se_sys_mount fs/namespace.c:3568 [inline]
__arm64_sys_mount+0x2f8/0x408 fs/namespace.c:3568
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.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% 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