In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ublk_drv: fix NULL pointer dereference in ublk_ctrl_start_recovery()
When two UBLK_CMD_START_USER_RECOVERY commands are submitted, the
first one sets 'ubq->ubq_daemon' to NULL, and the second one triggers
WARN in ublk_queue_reinit() and subsequently a NULL pointer dereference
issue.
Fix it by adding the check in ublk_ctrl_start_recovery() and return
immediately in case of zero 'ub->nr_queues_ready'.
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000028
RIP: 0010:ublk_ctrl_start_recovery.constprop.0+0x82/0x180
Call Trace:
? __die+0x20/0x70
? page_fault_oops+0x75/0x170
? exc_page_fault+0x64/0x140
? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30
? ublk_ctrl_start_recovery.constprop.0+0x82/0x180
ublk_ctrl_uring_cmd+0x4f7/0x6c0
? pick_next_task_idle+0x26/0x40
io_uring_cmd+0x9a/0x1b0
io_issue_sqe+0x193/0x3f0
io_wq_submit_work+0x9b/0x390
io_worker_handle_work+0x165/0x360
io_wq_worker+0xcb/0x2f0
? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x203/0x290
? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x203/0x290
? __pfx_io_wq_worker+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x50
? __pfx_io_wq_worker+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
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