In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
af_packet: move notifier's packet_dev_mc out of rcu critical section
Syzkaller reports the following issue:
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/mutex.c:578
__mutex_lock+0x106/0xe80 kernel/locking/mutex.c:746
team_change_rx_flags+0x38/0x220 drivers/net/team/team_core.c:1781
dev_change_rx_flags net/core/dev.c:9145 [inline]
__dev_set_promiscuity+0x3f8/0x590 net/core/dev.c:9189
netif_set_promiscuity+0x50/0xe0 net/core/dev.c:9201
dev_set_promiscuity+0x126/0x260 net/core/dev_api.c:286 packet_dev_mc net/packet/af_packet.c:3698 [inline]
packet_dev_mclist_delete net/packet/af_packet.c:3722 [inline]
packet_notifier+0x292/0xa60 net/packet/af_packet.c:4247
notifier_call_chain+0x1b3/0x3e0 kernel/notifier.c:85
call_netdevice_notifiers_extack net/core/dev.c:2214 [inline]
call_netdevice_notifiers net/core/dev.c:2228 [inline]
unregister_netdevice_many_notify+0x15d8/0x2330 net/core/dev.c:11972
rtnl_delete_link net/core/rtnetlink.c:3522 [inline]
rtnl_dellink+0x488/0x710 net/core/rtnetlink.c:3564
rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x7cf/0xb70 net/core/rtnetlink.c:6955
netlink_rcv_skb+0x219/0x490 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2534
Calling PACKET_ADD_MEMBERSHIP on an ops-locked device can trigger
the NETDEV_UNREGISTER notifier, which may require disabling promiscuous
and/or allmulti mode. Both of these operations require acquiring
the netdev instance lock.
Move the call to packet_dev_mc outside of the RCU critical section.
The mclist modifications (add, del, flush, unregister) are protected by
the RTNL, not the RCU. The RCU only protects the sklist and its
associated sks. The delayed operation on the mclist entry remains
within the RTNL.
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fixed version is listed under Patch Availability. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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)14 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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