In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
PCI: Hold rescan lock while adding devices during host probe
Since adding the PCI power control code, we may end up with a race between
the pwrctl platform device rescanning the bus and host controller probe
functions. The latter need to take the rescan lock when adding devices or
we may end up in an undefined state having two incompletely added devices
and hit the following crash when trying to remove the device over sysfs:
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000000
Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000004 [#1] SMP
Call trace:
__pi_strlen+0x14/0x150
kernfs_find_ns+0x80/0x13c
kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x54/0xf0
sysfs_remove_bin_file+0x24/0x34
pci_remove_resource_files+0x3c/0x84
pci_remove_sysfs_dev_files+0x28/0x38
pci_stop_bus_device+0x8c/0xd8
pci_stop_bus_device+0x40/0xd8
pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device_locked+0x28/0x48
remove_store+0x70/0xb0
dev_attr_store+0x20/0x38
sysfs_kf_write+0x58/0x78
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0xe8/0x184
vfs_write+0x2dc/0x308
ksys_write+0x7c/0xec
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