In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
wireguard: netlink: check for dangling peer via is_dead instead of empty list
If all peers are removed via wg_peer_remove_all(), rather than setting
peer_list to empty, the peer is added to a temporary list with a head on
the stack of wg_peer_remove_all(). If a netlink dump is resumed and the
cursored peer is one that has been removed via wg_peer_remove_all(), it
will iterate from that peer and then attempt to dump freed peers.
Fix this by instead checking peer->is_dead, which was explictly created
for this purpose. Also move up the device_update_lock lockdep assertion,
since reading is_dead relies on that.
It can be reproduced by a small script like:
echo "Setting config..."
ip link add dev wg0 type wireguard
wg setconf wg0 /big-config
(
while true; do
echo "Showing config..."
wg showconf wg0 > /dev/null
done
) &
sleep 4
wg setconf wg0 <(printf "[Peer]\nPublicKey=$(wg genkey)\n")
Resulting in:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __lock_acquire+0x182a/0x1b20
Read of size 8 at addr ffff88811956ec70 by task wg/59
CPU: 2 PID: 59 Comm: wg Not tainted 6.8.0-rc2-debug+ #5
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x47/0x70
print_address_description.constprop.0+0x2c/0x380
print_report+0xab/0x250
kasan_report+0xba/0xf0
__lock_acquire+0x182a/0x1b20
lock_acquire+0x191/0x4b0
down_read+0x80/0x440
get_peer+0x140/0xcb0
wg_get_device_dump+0x471/0x1130
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 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