In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ring-buffer: Fix deadloop issue on reading trace_pipe
Soft lockup occurs when reading file 'trace_pipe':
watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#6 stuck for 22s! [cat:4488]
[...]
RIP: 0010:ring_buffer_empty_cpu+0xed/0x170
RSP: 0018:ffff88810dd6fc48 EFLAGS: 00000246
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000246 RCX: ffffffff93d1aaeb
RDX: ffff88810a280040 RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffff88811164b218
RBP: ffff88811164b218 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffff88815156600f
R10: ffffed102a2acc01 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000051651901
R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff888115e49500 R15: 0000000000000000
[...]
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007f8d853c2000 CR3: 000000010dcd8000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
__find_next_entry+0x1a8/0x4b0
? peek_next_entry+0x250/0x250
? down_write+0xa5/0x120
? down_write_killable+0x130/0x130
trace_find_next_entry_inc+0x3b/0x1d0
tracing_read_pipe+0x423/0xae0
? tracing_splice_read_pipe+0xcb0/0xcb0
vfs_read+0x16b/0x490
ksys_read+0x105/0x210
? __ia32_sys_pwrite64+0x200/0x200
? switch_fpu_return+0x108/0x220
do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x61/0xc6
Through the vmcore, I found it's because in tracing_read_pipe(),
ring_buffer_empty_cpu() found some buffer is not empty but then it
cannot read anything due to "rb_num_of_entries() == 0" always true,
Then it infinitely loop the procedure due to user buffer not been
filled, see following code path:
tracing_read_pipe() {
... ...
waitagain:
tracing_wait_pipe() // 1. find non-empty buffer here
trace_find_next_entry_inc() // 2. loop here try to find an entry
__find_next_entry()
ring_buffer_empty_cpu(); // 3. find non-empty buffer
peek_next_entry() // 4. but peek always return NULL
ring_buffer_peek()
rb_buffer_peek()
rb_get_reader_page()
// 5. because rb_num_of_entries() == 0 always true here
// then return NULL
// 6. user buffer not been filled so goto 'waitgain'
// and eventually leads to an deadloop in kernel!!!
}
By some analyzing, I found that when resetting ringbuffer, the 'entries'
of its pages are not all cleared (see rb_reset_cpu()). Then when reducing
the ringbuffer, and if some reduced pages exist dirty 'entries' data, they
will be added into 'cpu_buffer->overrun' (see rb_remove_pages()), which
cause wrong 'overrun' count and eventually cause the deadloop issue.
To fix it, we need to clear every pages in rb_reset_cpu().
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 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 2026-10-27). 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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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