In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
inet: frags: fix use-after-free caused by the fqdir_pre_exit() flush
On netns teardown, fqdir_pre_exit() walks the fqdir rhashtable and
flushes every fragment queue that is not yet complete using
inet_frag_queue_flush(). That helper frees all the skbs queued on the
fragment queue but does not set INET_FRAG_COMPLETE, and leaves
q->fragments_tail and q->last_run_head pointing at the freed skbs.
The queue itself stays in the rhashtable.
fqdir_pre_exit() first lowers high_thresh to 0 to stop new queue lookups,
but it cannot stop a fragment that already obtained the queue through
inet_frag_find() earlier and stalled just before taking the queue lock.
Once that fragment resumes after the flush and takes the queue lock,
it passes the INET_FRAG_COMPLETE check and then dereferences the freed
fragments_tail. inet_frag_queue_insert() reads FRAG_CB() and ->len of
that pointer and, on the append path, writes ->next_frag, causing a
slab use-after-free. IPv6, nf_conntrack_reasm6 and 6lowpan reassembly
share the same flush path and are affected as well.
Reset rb_fragments, fragments_tail and last_run_head in
inet_frag_queue_flush() so a flushed queue no longer points at the
freed skbs. A fragment that resumes after the flush and takes the
queue lock then finds an empty queue and starts a new run instead of
dereferencing the freed fragments_tail. ip_frag_reinit() already
performed this reset after its own flush, so drop the now duplicate
code there.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). 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