In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
can: kvaser_pciefd: refine error prone echo_skb_max handling logic
echo_skb_max should define the supported upper limit of echo_skb[]
allocated inside the netdevice's priv. The corresponding size value
provided by this driver to alloc_candev() is KVASER_PCIEFD_CAN_TX_MAX_COUNT
which is 17.
But later echo_skb_max is rounded up to the nearest power of two (for the
max case, that would be 32) and the tx/ack indices calculated further
during tx/rx may exceed the upper array boundary. Kasan reported this for
the ack case inside kvaser_pciefd_handle_ack_packet(), though the xmit
function has actually caught the same thing earlier.
BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in kvaser_pciefd_handle_ack_packet+0x2d7/0x92a drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1528
Read of size 8 at addr ffff888105e4f078 by task swapper/4/0
CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/4 Not tainted 6.15.0 #12 PREEMPT(voluntary)
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl lib/dump_stack.c:122
print_report mm/kasan/report.c:521
kasan_report mm/kasan/report.c:634
kvaser_pciefd_handle_ack_packet drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1528
kvaser_pciefd_read_packet drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1605
kvaser_pciefd_read_buffer drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1656
kvaser_pciefd_receive_irq drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1684
kvaser_pciefd_irq_handler drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1733
__handle_irq_event_percpu kernel/irq/handle.c:158
handle_irq_event kernel/irq/handle.c:210
handle_edge_irq kernel/irq/chip.c:833
__common_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/irq.c:296
common_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/irq.c:286
Tx max count definitely matters for kvaser_pciefd_tx_avail(), but for seq
numbers' generation that's not the case - we're free to calculate them as
would be more convenient, not taking tx max count into account. The only
downside is that the size of echo_skb[] should correspond to the max seq
number (not tx max count), so in some situations a bit more memory would
be consumed than could be.
Thus make the size of the underlying echo_skb[] sufficient for the rounded
max tx value.
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 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 2026-11-02). 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 fix is available. 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