In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ppp: Fix KMSAN uninit-value warning with bpf
Syzbot caught an "KMSAN: uninit-value" warning [1], which is caused by the
ppp driver not initializing a 2-byte header when using socket filter.
The following code can generate a PPP filter BPF program:
'''
struct bpf_program fp;
pcap_t *handle;
handle = pcap_open_dead(DLT_PPP_PPPD, 65535);
pcap_compile(handle, &fp, "ip and outbound", 0, 0);
bpf_dump(&fp, 1);
'''
Its output is:
'''
(000) ldh [2]
(001) jeq #0x21 jt 2 jf 5
(002) ldb [0]
(003) jeq #0x1 jt 4 jf 5
(004) ret #65535
(005) ret #0
'''
Wen can find similar code at the following link:
https://github.com/ppp-project/ppp/blob/master/pppd/options.c#L1680
The maintainer of this code repository is also the original maintainer
of the ppp driver.
As you can see the BPF program skips 2 bytes of data and then reads the
'Protocol' field to determine if it's an IP packet. Then it read the first
byte of the first 2 bytes to determine the direction.
The issue is that only the first byte indicating direction is initialized
in current ppp driver code while the second byte is not initialized.
For normal BPF programs generated by libpcap, uninitialized data won't be
used, so it's not a problem. However, for carefully crafted BPF programs,
such as those generated by syzkaller [2], which start reading from offset
0, the uninitialized data will be used and caught by KMSAN.
[1] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=853242d9c9917165d791
[2] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/text?tag=ReproC&x=11994913980000
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