In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
llc: verify mac len before reading mac header
LLC reads the mac header with eth_hdr without verifying that the skb
has an Ethernet header.
Syzbot was able to enter llc_rcv on a tun device. Tun can insert
packets without mac len and with user configurable skb->protocol
(passing a tun_pi header when not configuring IFF_NO_PI).
BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in llc_station_ac_send_test_r net/llc/llc_station.c:81 [inline]
BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in llc_station_rcv+0x6fb/0x1290 net/llc/llc_station.c:111
llc_station_ac_send_test_r net/llc/llc_station.c:81 [inline]
llc_station_rcv+0x6fb/0x1290 net/llc/llc_station.c:111
llc_rcv+0xc5d/0x14a0 net/llc/llc_input.c:218
__netif_receive_skb_one_core net/core/dev.c:5523 [inline]
__netif_receive_skb+0x1a6/0x5a0 net/core/dev.c:5637
netif_receive_skb_internal net/core/dev.c:5723 [inline]
netif_receive_skb+0x58/0x660 net/core/dev.c:5782
tun_rx_batched+0x3ee/0x980 drivers/net/tun.c:1555
tun_get_user+0x54c5/0x69c0 drivers/net/tun.c:2002
Add a mac_len test before all three eth_hdr(skb) calls under net/llc.
There are further uses in include/net/llc_pdu.h. All these are
protected by a test skb->protocol == ETH_P_802_2. Which does not
protect against this tun scenario.
But the mac_len test added in this patch in llc_fixup_skb will
indirectly protect those too. That is called from llc_rcv before any
other LLC code.
It is tempting to just add a blanket mac_len check in llc_rcv, but
not sure whether that could break valid LLC paths that do not assume
an Ethernet header. 802.2 LLC may be used on top of non-802.3
protocols in principle. The below referenced commit shows that used
to, on top of Token Ring.
At least one of the three eth_hdr uses goes back to before the start
of git history. But the one that syzbot exercises is introduced in
this commit. That commit is old enough (2008), that effectively all
stable kernels should receive this.
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