In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Fix race in devmap on PREEMPT_RT
On PREEMPT_RT kernels, the per-CPU xdp_dev_bulk_queue (bq) can be
accessed concurrently by multiple preemptible tasks on the same CPU.
The original code assumes bq_enqueue() and __dev_flush() run atomically
with respect to each other on the same CPU, relying on
local_bh_disable() to prevent preemption. However, on PREEMPT_RT,
local_bh_disable() only calls migrate_disable() (when
PREEMPT_RT_NEEDS_BH_LOCK is not set) and does not disable
preemption, which allows CFS scheduling to preempt a task during
bq_xmit_all(), enabling another task on the same CPU to enter
bq_enqueue() and operate on the same per-CPU bq concurrently.
This leads to several races:
- Double-free / use-after-free on bq->q[]: bq_xmit_all() snapshots
cnt = bq->count, then iterates bq->q[0..cnt-1] to transmit frames.
If preempted after the snapshot, a second task can call bq_enqueue()
-> bq_xmit_all() on the same bq, transmitting (and freeing) the
same frames. When the first task resumes, it operates on stale
pointers in bq->q[], causing use-after-free.
- bq->count and bq->q[] corruption: concurrent bq_enqueue() modifying
bq->count and bq->q[] while bq_xmit_all() is reading them.
- dev_rx/xdp_prog teardown race: __dev_flush() clears bq->dev_rx and
bq->xdp_prog after bq_xmit_all(). If preempted between
bq_xmit_all() return and bq->dev_rx = NULL, a preempting
bq_enqueue() sees dev_rx still set (non-NULL), skips adding bq to
the flush_list, and enqueues a frame. When __dev_flush() resumes,
it clears dev_rx and removes bq from the flush_list, orphaning the
newly enqueued frame.
- __list_del_clearprev() on flush_node: similar to the cpumap race,
both tasks can call __list_del_clearprev() on the same flush_node,
the second dereferences the prev pointer already set to NULL.
The race between task A (__dev_flush -> bq_xmit_all) and task B
(bq_enqueue -> bq_xmit_all) on the same CPU:
Task A (xdp_do_flush) Task B (ndo_xdp_xmit redirect)
---------------------- --------------------------------
__dev_flush(flush_list)
bq_xmit_all(bq)
cnt = bq->count /* e.g. 16 */
/* start iterating bq->q[] */
<-- CFS preempts Task A -->
bq_enqueue(dev, xdpf)
bq->count == DEV_MAP_BULK_SIZE
bq_xmit_all(bq, 0)
cnt = bq->count /* same 16! */
ndo_xdp_xmit(bq->q[])
/* frames freed by driver */
bq->count = 0
<-- Task A resumes -->
ndo_xdp_xmit(bq->q[])
/* use-after-free: frames already freed! */
Fix this by adding a local_lock_t to xdp_dev_bulk_queue and acquiring
it in bq_enqueue() and __dev_flush(). These paths already run under
local_bh_disable(), so use local_lock_nested_bh() which on non-RT is
a pure annotation with no overhead, and on PREEMPT_RT provides a
per-CPU sleeping lock that serializes access to the bq.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.0 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 2026-10-30). 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