In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfilter: ebtables: terminate table name before find_table_lock()
update_counters() and compat_update_counters() forward a user-supplied
32-byte table name to find_table_lock() without NUL-terminating it. On a
lookup miss, find_inlist_lock() calls try_then_request_module(..., "%s%s",
"ebtable_", name), and vsnprintf() reads past the name field and the
stack object until it hits a zero byte.
BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in string (lib/vsprintf.c:648 lib/vsprintf.c:730)
Read of size 1 at addr ffff8880119dfb20 by task exploit/147
Call Trace:
...
string (lib/vsprintf.c:648 lib/vsprintf.c:730)
vsnprintf (lib/vsprintf.c:2945)
__request_module (kernel/module/kmod.c:150)
do_update_counters.isra.0 (net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:371 net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:380)
update_counters (net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1440)
do_ebt_set_ctl (net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:2573)
nf_setsockopt (net/netfilter/nf_sockopt.c:101)
ip_setsockopt (net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c:1424)
raw_setsockopt (net/ipv4/raw.c:847)
__sys_setsockopt (net/socket.c:2393)
...
compat_do_replace() shares the same unterminated name via
compat_copy_ebt_replace_from_user(); terminate it there too so all
find_table_lock() callers behave alike. The other callers already
terminate the name after the copy.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 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 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