In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: fix segmentation of forwarding fraglist GRO
This patch enhances GSO segment handling by properly checking
the SKB_GSO_DODGY flag for frag_list GSO packets, addressing
low throughput issues observed when a station accesses IPv4
servers via hotspots with an IPv6-only upstream interface.
Specifically, it fixes a bug in GSO segmentation when forwarding
GRO packets containing a frag_list. The function skb_segment_list
cannot correctly process GRO skbs that have been converted by XLAT,
since XLAT only translates the header of the head skb. Consequently,
skbs in the frag_list may remain untranslated, resulting in protocol
inconsistencies and reduced throughput.
To address this, the patch explicitly sets the SKB_GSO_DODGY flag
for GSO packets in XLAT's IPv4/IPv6 protocol translation helpers
(bpf_skb_proto_4_to_6 and bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4). This marks GSO
packets as potentially modified after protocol translation. As a
result, GSO segmentation will avoid using skb_segment_list and
instead falls back to skb_segment for packets with the SKB_GSO_DODGY
flag. This ensures that only safe and fully translated frag_list
packets are processed by skb_segment_list, resolving protocol
inconsistencies and improving throughput when forwarding GRO packets
converted by XLAT.
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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 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 every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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)60 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 partial (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