In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
Bluetooth: L2CAP: Fix memory leak in vhci_write
Syzkaller reports a memory leak as follows:
====================================
BUG: memory leak
unreferenced object 0xffff88810d81ac00 (size 240):
[...]
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
backtrace:
[] __alloc_skb+0x1f9/0x270 net/core/skbuff.c:418
[] alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:1257 [inline]
[] bt_skb_alloc include/net/bluetooth/bluetooth.h:469 [inline]
[] vhci_get_user drivers/bluetooth/hci_vhci.c:391 [inline]
[] vhci_write+0x5f/0x230 drivers/bluetooth/hci_vhci.c:511
[] call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:2192 [inline]
[] new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
[] vfs_write+0x42d/0x540 fs/read_write.c:578
[] ksys_write+0x9d/0x160 fs/read_write.c:631
[] do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline]
[] do_syscall_64+0x35/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80
[] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
====================================
HCI core will uses hci_rx_work() to process frame, which is queued to
the hdev->rx_q tail in hci_recv_frame() by HCI driver.
Yet the problem is that, HCI core may not free the skb after handling
ACL data packets. To be more specific, when start fragment does not
contain the L2CAP length, HCI core just copies skb into conn->rx_skb and
finishes frame process in l2cap_recv_acldata(), without freeing the skb,
which triggers the above memory leak.
This patch solves it by releasing the relative skb, after processing
the above case in l2cap_recv_acldata().
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