In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
dpll: fix dpll_pin_on_pin_register() for multiple parent pins
In scenario where pin is registered with multiple parent pins via
dpll_pin_on_pin_register(..), all belonging to the same dpll device.
A second call to dpll_pin_on_pin_unregister(..) would cause a call trace,
as it tries to use already released registration resources (due to fix
introduced in b446631f355e). In this scenario pin was registered twice,
so resources are not yet expected to be release until each registered
pin/pin pair is unregistered.
Currently, the following crash/call trace is produced when ice driver is
removed on the system with installed E810T NIC which includes dpll device:
WARNING: CPU: 51 PID: 9155 at drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c:809 dpll_pin_ops+0x20/0x30
RIP: 0010:dpll_pin_ops+0x20/0x30
Call Trace:
? __warn+0x7f/0x130
? dpll_pin_ops+0x20/0x30
dpll_msg_add_pin_freq+0x37/0x1d0
dpll_cmd_pin_get_one+0x1c0/0x400
? __nlmsg_put+0x63/0x80
dpll_pin_event_send+0x93/0x140
dpll_pin_on_pin_unregister+0x3f/0x100
ice_dpll_deinit_pins+0xa1/0x230 [ice]
ice_remove+0xf1/0x210 [ice]
Fix by adding a parent pointer as a cookie when creating a registration,
also when searching for it. For the regular pins pass NULL, this allows to
create separated registration for each parent the pin is registered with.
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