In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
staging: rtl8723bs: fix xmit_frame/xmit_buf leaks on mgnt-frame error paths
issue_beacon(), issue_probersp() and issue_asocrsp() obtain a management
xmit_frame together with its xmit_buf from the driver's fixed-size
management-TX pools via alloc_mgtxmitframe(). On the normal path the frame
is handed to dump_mgntframe(), which transfers ownership and eventually
returns both objects to their pools (the frame and, for beacons, the buf
in rtl8723bs_mgnt_xmit(); other bufs via the pending-xmitbuf/TX-completion
path).
Several error/edge paths return early after a successful
alloc_mgtxmitframe() but before dump_mgntframe(), so ownership is never
transferred and neither object is freed:
- issue_beacon(): beacon larger than 512 bytes
- issue_probersp(): cur_network->ie_length > MAX_IE_SZ
- issue_probersp(): kzalloc() of the SSID scratch buffer fails
- issue_asocrsp(): pkt_type is neither ASSOCRSP nor REASSOCRSP
Because alloc_mgtxmitframe() removes the frame and buf from their free
lists (list_del_init) without placing them on any pending list, an
orphaned pair is on no list and referenced by nobody, so it is only
reclaimed at driver teardown. Repeated hits progressively exhaust the
management-TX pools until alloc_mgtxmitframe() returns NULL and the
interface can no longer send beacons or probe/assoc responses.
Free the frame and buffer on these paths, matching the existing correct
error handling in issue_assocreq().
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. 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