In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
PCI/DPC: Fix use-after-free on concurrent DPC and hot-removal
Keith reports a use-after-free when a DPC event occurs concurrently to
hot-removal of the same portion of the hierarchy:
The dpc_handler() awaits readiness of the secondary bus below the
Downstream Port where the DPC event occurred. To do so, it polls the
config space of the first child device on the secondary bus. If that
child device is concurrently removed, accesses to its struct pci_dev
cause the kernel to oops.
That's because pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus() neglects to hold a
reference on the child device. Before v6.3, the function was only
called on resume from system sleep or on runtime resume. Holding a
reference wasn't necessary back then because the pciehp IRQ thread
could never run concurrently. (On resume from system sleep, IRQs are
not enabled until after the resume_noirq phase. And runtime resume is
always awaited before a PCI device is removed.)
However starting with v6.3, pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus() is also
called on a DPC event. Commit 53b54ad074de ("PCI/DPC: Await readiness
of secondary bus after reset"), which introduced that, failed to
appreciate that pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus() now needs to hold a
reference on the child device because dpc_handler() and pciehp may
indeed run concurrently. The commit was backported to v5.10+ stable
kernels, so that's the oldest one affected.
Add the missing reference acquisition.
Abridged stack trace:
BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 00000000091400c0
CPU: 15 PID: 2464 Comm: irq/53-pcie-dpc 6.9.0
RIP: pci_bus_read_config_dword+0x17/0x50
pci_dev_wait()
pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus()
dpc_reset_link()
pcie_do_recovery()
dpc_handler()
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