In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fbcon: Set fb_display[i]->mode to NULL when the mode is released
Recently, we discovered the following issue through syzkaller:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in fb_mode_is_equal+0x285/0x2f0
Read of size 4 at addr ff11000001b3c69c by task syz.xxx
...
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0xab/0xe0
print_address_description.constprop.0+0x2c/0x390
print_report+0xb9/0x280
kasan_report+0xb8/0xf0
fb_mode_is_equal+0x285/0x2f0
fbcon_mode_deleted+0x129/0x180
fb_set_var+0xe7f/0x11d0
do_fb_ioctl+0x6a0/0x750
fb_ioctl+0xe0/0x140
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x193/0x210
do_syscall_64+0x5f/0x9c0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
Based on experimentation and analysis, during framebuffer unregistration,
only the memory of fb_info->modelist is freed, without setting the
corresponding fb_display[i]->mode to NULL for the freed modes. This leads
to UAF issues during subsequent accesses. Here's an example of reproduction
steps:
- With /dev/fb0 already registered in the system, load a kernel module
to register a new device /dev/fb1;
- Set fb1's mode to the global fb_display[] array (via FBIOPUT_CON2FBMAP);
- Switch console from fb to VGA (to allow normal rmmod of the ko);
- Unload the kernel module, at this point fb1's modelist is freed, leaving
a wild pointer in fb_display[];
- Trigger the bug via system calls through fb0 attempting to delete a mode
from fb0.
Add a check in do_unregister_framebuffer(): if the mode to be freed exists
in fb_display[], set the corresponding mode pointer to NULL.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-29). 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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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)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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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