In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
cachefiles: fix slab-use-after-free in cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read()
We got the following issue in a fuzz test of randomly issuing the restore
command:
==================================================================
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read+0xb41/0xb60
Read of size 8 at addr ffff888122e84088 by task ondemand-04-dae/963
CPU: 13 PID: 963 Comm: ondemand-04-dae Not tainted 6.8.0-dirty #564
Call Trace:
kasan_report+0x93/0xc0
cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read+0xb41/0xb60
vfs_read+0x169/0xb50
ksys_read+0xf5/0x1e0
Allocated by task 116:
kmem_cache_alloc+0x140/0x3a0
cachefiles_lookup_cookie+0x140/0xcd0
fscache_cookie_state_machine+0x43c/0x1230
[...]
Freed by task 792:
kmem_cache_free+0xfe/0x390
cachefiles_put_object+0x241/0x480
fscache_cookie_state_machine+0x5c8/0x1230
[...]
==================================================================
Following is the process that triggers the issue:
mount | daemon_thread1 | daemon_thread2
------------------------------------------------------------
cachefiles_withdraw_cookie
cachefiles_ondemand_clean_object(object)
cachefiles_ondemand_send_req
REQ_A = kzalloc(sizeof(*req) + data_len)
wait_for_completion(&REQ_A->done)
cachefiles_daemon_read
cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read
REQ_A = cachefiles_ondemand_select_req
msg->object_id = req->object->ondemand->ondemand_id
------ restore ------
cachefiles_ondemand_restore
xas_for_each(&xas, req, ULONG_MAX)
xas_set_mark(&xas, CACHEFILES_REQ_NEW)
cachefiles_daemon_read
cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read
REQ_A = cachefiles_ondemand_select_req
copy_to_user(_buffer, msg, n)
xa_erase(&cache->reqs, id)
complete(&REQ_A->done)
------ close(fd) ------
cachefiles_ondemand_fd_release
cachefiles_put_object
cachefiles_put_object
kmem_cache_free(cachefiles_object_jar, object)
REQ_A->object->ondemand->ondemand_id
// object UAF !!!
When we see the request within xa_lock, req->object must not have been
freed yet, so grab the reference count of object before xa_unlock to
avoid the above issue.
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
- 0.3% 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 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