In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfilter: nf_queue: pin bridge device while NFQUEUE holds fake dst
The br_netfilter fake rtable is embedded in struct net_bridge and is
attached to bridged packets with skb_dst_set_noref(). If such a packet is
queued to NFQUEUE, __nf_queue() upgrades that fake dst with
skb_dst_force().
At that point the queued skb can hold a real dst reference after bridge
teardown has started. The problem is not that every bridged packet needs
its own dst reference. The problem is that NFQUEUE can keep the bridge
private fake dst alive after unregister begins.
Fix this by keeping the bridge fake dst model unchanged and pinning the
bridge master device only while the packet sits in NFQUEUE. Record the
bridge device in nf_queue_entry when the queued skb carries a bridge fake
dst, take a device reference for the queue lifetime, and drop it when the
queue entry is freed.
Also make sure queued entries are reaped when that bridge device goes
down, and drop the redundant nf_bridge_info_exists() test from the fake
dst detection.
This keeps netdev_priv(br->dev) alive until verdict completion, so the
embedded fake rtable and its metrics backing storage cannot be freed out
from under dst_release(). It also avoids the constant refcount bump and
avoids using ipv4-specific dst helpers for IPv6 bridge traffic.
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
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). 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