In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
clk: clk-loongson2: Fix potential buffer overflow in flexible-array member access
Flexible-array member hws in struct clk_hw_onecell_data is annotated
with the counted_by() attribute. This means that when memory is
allocated for this array, the _counter_, which in this case is member
num in the flexible structure, should be set to the maximum number of
elements the flexible array can contain, or fewer.
In this case, the total number of elements for the flexible array is
determined by variable clks_num when allocating heap space via
devm_kzalloc(), as shown below:
289 struct loongson2_clk_provider *clp;
...
296 for (p = data; p->name; p++)
297 clks_num++;
298
299 clp = devm_kzalloc(dev, struct_size(clp, clk_data.hws, clks_num),
300 GFP_KERNEL);
So, clp->clk_data.num should be set to clks_num or less, and not
exceed clks_num, as is currently the case. Otherwise, if data is
written into clp->clk_data.hws[clks_num], the instrumentation
provided by the compiler won't detect the overflow, leading to a
memory corruption bug at runtime.
Fix this issue by setting clp->clk_data.num to clks_num.
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