In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf, test_run: Fix alignment problem in bpf_prog_test_run_skb()
We got a syzkaller problem because of aarch64 alignment fault
if KFENCE enabled. When the size from user bpf program is an odd
number, like 399, 407, etc, it will cause the struct skb_shared_info's
unaligned access. As seen below:
BUG: KFENCE: use-after-free read in __skb_clone+0x23c/0x2a0 net/core/skbuff.c:1032
Use-after-free read at 0xffff6254fffac077 (in kfence-#213):
__lse_atomic_add arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h:26 [inline]
arch_atomic_add arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h:28 [inline]
arch_atomic_inc include/linux/atomic-arch-fallback.h:270 [inline]
atomic_inc include/asm-generic/atomic-instrumented.h:241 [inline]
__skb_clone+0x23c/0x2a0 net/core/skbuff.c:1032
skb_clone+0xf4/0x214 net/core/skbuff.c:1481
____bpf_clone_redirect net/core/filter.c:2433 [inline]
bpf_clone_redirect+0x78/0x1c0 net/core/filter.c:2420
bpf_prog_d3839dd9068ceb51+0x80/0x330
bpf_dispatcher_nop_func include/linux/bpf.h:728 [inline]
bpf_test_run+0x3c0/0x6c0 net/bpf/test_run.c:53
bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x638/0xa7c net/bpf/test_run.c:594
bpf_prog_test_run kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3148 [inline]
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4441 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf+0xad0/0x1634 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4381
kfence-#213: 0xffff6254fffac000-0xffff6254fffac196, size=407, cache=kmalloc-512
allocated by task 15074 on cpu 0 at 1342.585390s:
kmalloc include/linux/slab.h:568 [inline]
kzalloc include/linux/slab.h:675 [inline]
bpf_test_init.isra.0+0xac/0x290 net/bpf/test_run.c:191
bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x11c/0xa7c net/bpf/test_run.c:512
bpf_prog_test_run kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3148 [inline]
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4441 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf+0xad0/0x1634 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4381
__arm64_sys_bpf+0x50/0x60 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4381
To fix the problem, we adjust @size so that (@size + @hearoom) is a
multiple of SMP_CACHE_BYTES. So we make sure the struct skb_shared_info
is aligned to a cache line.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-28). 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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)14 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 total (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