In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bridge: mcast: Fix a possible use-after-free when removing a bridge port
When per-VLAN multicast snooping is enabled, the bridge iterates over
all the bridge ports, disables the per-port multicast context on each
port and enables the per-{port, VLAN} multicast contexts instead. The
reverse happens when per-VLAN multicast snooping is disabled.
When global multicast snooping is enabled, the bridge iterates over all
the bridge ports and enables the per-port multicast context on each
port. The reverse happens when multicast snooping is disabled.
The above scheme can result in a situation where both types of contexts
(per-port and per-{port, VLAN}) are enabled on a single bridge port:
# ip link add name br1 up type bridge mcast_snooping 1 mcast_querier 1 vlan_filtering 1
# ip link add name dummy1 up master br1 type dummy
# ip link set dev br1 type bridge mcast_vlan_snooping 1
# ip link set dev br1 type bridge mcast_snooping 0
# ip link set dev br1 type bridge mcast_snooping 1
This is not intended and it is a problem since the commit cited below.
Prior to this commit, when removing a bridge port,
br_multicast_disable_port() would disable the per-port multicast context
and the per-{port, VLAN} multicast contexts would get disabled when
flushing VLANs.
After this commit, br_multicast_disable_port() only disables the
per-port multicast context if per-VLAN multicast snooping is disabled.
If both types of contexts were enabled on the port when it was removed,
the per-port multicast context would remain enabled when freeing the
bridge port, leading to a use-after-free [1].
Fix by preventing the bridge from enabling / disabling the per-port
multicast contexts when toggling global multicast snooping if per-VLAN
multicast snooping is enabled.
[1]
ODEBUG: free active (active state 0) object: ffff88810f8bda78 object type: timer_list hint: br_ip6_multicast_port_query_expired (net/bridge/br_multicast.c:1927)
WARNING: lib/debugobjects.c:629 at debug_print_object+0x1b1/0x3e0, CPU#5: swapper/5/0
[...]
Call Trace:
__debug_check_no_obj_freed (lib/debugobjects.c:1116)
kfree (mm/slub.c:2620 mm/slub.c:6250 mm/slub.c:6565)
kobject_cleanup (lib/kobject.c:689)
rcu_do_batch (kernel/rcu/tree.c:2617)
rcu_core (kernel/rcu/tree.c:2869)
handle_softirqs (kernel/softirq.c:622)
__irq_exit_rcu (kernel/softirq.c:656 kernel/softirq.c:496 kernel/softirq.c:735)
irq_exit_rcu (kernel/softirq.c:752)
sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt (arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1061 (discriminator 47) arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1061 (discriminator 47))
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