In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tipc: clear sock->sk on the failed-insert path in tipc_sk_create()
When tipc_sk_create() fails to insert the new socket (tipc_sk_insert()
returns non-zero), its error path frees the sk with sk_free() but leaves
sock->sk pointing at the freed object:
if (tipc_sk_insert(tsk)) {
sk_free(sk);
pr_warn("Socket create failed; port number exhausted\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
This is harmless for plain socket(): the syscall layer clears sock->ops
before releasing, so tipc_release() is never called. It is not harmless
on the accept() path. tipc_accept() creates the pre-allocated child
socket with tipc_sk_create(net, new_sock, 0, kern); on failure it leaves
new_sock->sk dangling and new_sock->ops non-NULL, and do_accept() then
fput()s the new file, so __sock_release() -> tipc_release() runs
lock_sock(new_sock->sk) on the freed sk -- a use-after-free write of the
sk_lock spinlock.
tipc_release() already guards this exact "failed accept() releases a
pre-allocated child" case with "if (sk == NULL) return 0;", but the
guard is bypassed because tipc_sk_create() left sock->sk non-NULL
(dangling) rather than NULL.
Clear sock->sk on the failed-insert path so the existing tipc_release()
NULL check fires and the use-after-free is avoided.
The tipc_sk_insert() failure is reached when the per-netns socket
rhashtable hits its max_size (tsk_rht_params.max_size = 1048576, ~2M
elements) -- i.e. once a netns holds ~2M TIPC sockets every insert
returns -E2BIG.
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in lock_sock_nested (net/core/sock.c:3839)
Write of size 8 at addr ffff8880047cdc38 by task init/1
lock_sock_nested (net/core/sock.c:3839)
tipc_release (net/tipc/socket.c:638)
__sock_release (net/socket.c:710)
sock_close (net/socket.c:1501)
__fput (fs/file_table.c:512)
Allocated by task 1:
sk_alloc (net/core/sock.c:2308)
tipc_sk_create (net/tipc/socket.c:487)
tipc_accept (net/tipc/socket.c:2744)
do_accept (net/socket.c:2034)
Freed by task 1:
__sk_destruct (net/core/sock.c:2391)
tipc_sk_create (net/tipc/socket.c:504)
tipc_accept (net/tipc/socket.c:2744)
do_accept (net/socket.c:2034)
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
- 0.5% 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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