In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ipv6: addrconf: bail out of dad_failure when state is no longer POSTDAD
addrconf_dad_failure() transitions ifp->state from DAD to POSTDAD
via addrconf_dad_end(), which drops ifp->lock on return. The lock
is re-acquired after net_info_ratelimited(). A concurrent
ipv6_del_addr() can take the lock in that window, set ifp->state
to DEAD and run list_del_rcu(&ifp->if_list).
addrconf_dad_failure() then overwrites DEAD with ERRDAD at errdad:
and schedules a new dad_work. The work calls ipv6_del_addr()
again, hitting the already-poisoned list entry:
general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI
CPU: 4 PID: 217 Comm: kworker/4:1
Workqueue: ipv6_addrconf addrconf_dad_work
RIP: 0010:ipv6_del_addr+0xe9/0x280
RAX: dead000000000122
Call Trace:
addrconf_dad_stop+0x113/0x140
addrconf_dad_work+0x28c/0x430
process_one_work+0x1eb/0x3b0
worker_thread+0x4d/0x400
kthread+0x104/0x140
ret_from_fork+0x35/0x40
Fold the addrconf_dad_end() logic into addrconf_dad_failure() under
a single ifp->lock critical section. The STABLE_PRIVACY branch
temporarily drops ifp->lock around address regeneration, so at
lock_errdad: verify the state is still POSTDAD before transitioning
to ERRDAD; bail out otherwise to avoid overwriting a state set by
another path while the lock was released.
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