In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nfsd: provide locking for v4_end_grace
Writing to v4_end_grace can race with server shutdown and result in
memory being accessed after it was freed - reclaim_str_hashtbl in
particularly.
We cannot hold nfsd_mutex across the nfsd4_end_grace() call as that is
held while client_tracking_op->init() is called and that can wait for
an upcall to nfsdcltrack which can write to v4_end_grace, resulting in a
deadlock.
nfsd4_end_grace() is also called by the landromat work queue and this
doesn't require locking as server shutdown will stop the work and wait
for it before freeing anything that nfsd4_end_grace() might access.
However, we must be sure that writing to v4_end_grace doesn't restart
the work item after shutdown has already waited for it. For this we
add a new flag protected with nn->client_lock. It is set only while it
is safe to make client tracking calls, and v4_end_grace only schedules
work while the flag is set with the spinlock held.
So this patch adds a nfsd_net field "client_tracking_active" which is
set as described. Another field "grace_end_forced", is set when
v4_end_grace is written. After this is set, and providing
client_tracking_active is set, the laundromat is scheduled.
This "grace_end_forced" field bypasses other checks for whether the
grace period has finished.
This resolves a race which can result in use-after-free.
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 2026-10-27). 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