In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tcp: properly terminate timers for kernel sockets
We had various syzbot reports about tcp timers firing after
the corresponding netns has been dismantled.
Fortunately Josef Bacik could trigger the issue more often,
and could test a patch I wrote two years ago.
When TCP sockets are closed, we call inet_csk_clear_xmit_timers()
to 'stop' the timers.
inet_csk_clear_xmit_timers() can be called from any context,
including when socket lock is held.
This is the reason it uses sk_stop_timer(), aka del_timer().
This means that ongoing timers might finish much later.
For user sockets, this is fine because each running timer
holds a reference on the socket, and the user socket holds
a reference on the netns.
For kernel sockets, we risk that the netns is freed before
timer can complete, because kernel sockets do not hold
reference on the netns.
This patch adds inet_csk_clear_xmit_timers_sync() function
that using sk_stop_timer_sync() to make sure all timers
are terminated before the kernel socket is released.
Modules using kernel sockets close them in their netns exit()
handler.
Also add sock_not_owned_by_me() helper to get LOCKDEP
support : inet_csk_clear_xmit_timers_sync() must not be called
while socket lock is held.
It is very possible we can revert in the future commit
3a58f13a881e ("net: rds: acquire refcount on TCP sockets")
which attempted to solve the issue in rds only.
(net/smc/af_smc.c and net/mptcp/subflow.c have similar code)
We probably can remove the check_net() tests from
tcp_out_of_resources() and __tcp_close() in the future.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.8 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% 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