In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sched: sch_cake: fix bulk flow accounting logic for host fairness
In sch_cake, we keep track of the count of active bulk flows per host,
when running in dst/src host fairness mode, which is used as the
round-robin weight when iterating through flows. The count of active
bulk flows is updated whenever a flow changes state.
This has a peculiar interaction with the hash collision handling: when a
hash collision occurs (after the set-associative hashing), the state of
the hash bucket is simply updated to match the new packet that collided,
and if host fairness is enabled, that also means assigning new per-host
state to the flow. For this reason, the bulk flow counters of the
host(s) assigned to the flow are decremented, before new state is
assigned (and the counters, which may not belong to the same host
anymore, are incremented again).
Back when this code was introduced, the host fairness mode was always
enabled, so the decrement was unconditional. When the configuration
flags were introduced the *increment* was made conditional, but
the *decrement* was not. Which of course can lead to a spurious
decrement (and associated wrap-around to U16_MAX).
AFAICT, when host fairness is disabled, the decrement and wrap-around
happens as soon as a hash collision occurs (which is not that common in
itself, due to the set-associative hashing). However, in most cases this
is harmless, as the value is only used when host fairness mode is
enabled. So in order to trigger an array overflow, sch_cake has to first
be configured with host fairness disabled, and while running in this
mode, a hash collision has to occur to cause the overflow. Then, the
qdisc has to be reconfigured to enable host fairness, which leads to the
array out-of-bounds because the wrapped-around value is retained and
used as an array index. It seems that syzbot managed to trigger this,
which is quite impressive in its own right.
This patch fixes the issue by introducing the same conditional check on
decrement as is used on increment.
The original bug predates the upstreaming of cake, but the commit listed
in the Fixes tag touched that code, meaning that this patch won't apply
before that.
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 2026-10-27). 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