In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
erofs: reliably distinguish block based and fscache mode
When erofs_kill_sb() is called in block dev based mode, s_bdev may not
have been initialised yet, and if CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ONDEMAND is enabled,
it will be mistaken for fscache mode, and then attempt to free an anon_dev
that has never been allocated, triggering the following warning:
============================================
ida_free called for id=0 which is not allocated.
WARNING: CPU: 14 PID: 926 at lib/idr.c:525 ida_free+0x134/0x140
Modules linked in:
CPU: 14 PID: 926 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.9.0-rc3-dirty #630
RIP: 0010:ida_free+0x134/0x140
Call Trace:
erofs_kill_sb+0x81/0x90
deactivate_locked_super+0x35/0x80
get_tree_bdev+0x136/0x1e0
vfs_get_tree+0x2c/0xf0
do_new_mount+0x190/0x2f0
[...]
============================================
Now when erofs_kill_sb() is called, erofs_sb_info must have been
initialised, so use sbi->fsid to distinguish between the two modes.
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