In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nfsd: fix UAF in async copy cancel and shutdown
An async copy could be freed or used after free while a teardown caller
(OFFLOAD_CANCEL, nfsd4_shutdown_copy, nfsd4_cancel_copy_by_sb) raced the
copy kthread:
- find_async_copy() bumped copy->refcount but left the copy on
clp->async_copies, so the reaper's cleanup_async_copy() could run
release_copy_files() concurrently with a cancel/shutdown caller. Both
put and NULL nf_src/nf_dst without a common lock, double-putting the
nfsd_file and freeing it early.
- nfsd4_do_async_copy() set NFSD4_COPY_F_STOPPED before its final uses
of the copy (nfsd_update_cmtime_attr() on copy->nf_dst,
nfsd4_send_cb_offload()). nfsd4_stop_copy() treats a set STOPPED bit
as "kthread done, skip kthread_stop()", so a teardown caller ran
release_copy_files() -- which puts and NULLs nf_dst -- while the
kthread still dereferenced it (NULL/UAF).
- copy->copy_task was never pinned. The one-shot kthread self-reaps on
return, so kthread_stop()'s get_task_struct() could touch a freed
task_struct.
- co_cb is embedded in the copy, but nfsd4_send_cb_offload() held a
reference only on the client, so a concurrent teardown could free
the copy while the CB_OFFLOAD callback was in flight.
Fix the teardown lifetime as a whole:
- find_async_copy() unlinks the copy (clear cp_clp, list_del_init)
under async_lock; the cancel, shutdown, and sb-cancel paths drop the
list-membership reference via nfs4_put_copy() after nfsd4_stop_copy().
Drop the now-redundant list_del fixup from cleanup_async_copy().
- Because unlinking hides the copy from the reaper, its
cleanup_async_copy() can no longer remove the copy's s2s_cp_stateids
entry; the cancel/shutdown/sb-cancel paths now call
nfs4_free_copy_state() themselves (while cp_clp is still valid) so
the entry does not dangle at freed memory for the laundromat and
manage_cpntf_state() to dereference.
- Give the kthread its own reference, taken in nfsd4_copy() before
wake_up_process() and dropped at the end of nfsd4_do_async_copy();
call wake_up_process() before list_add().
- Pin the task_struct with get_task_struct() in nfsd4_copy(), released
in nfs4_put_copy(), so kthread_stop() is safe whenever the kthread
exits. Set NFSD4_COPY_F_STOPPED only in nfsd4_stop_copy(), which now
always kthread_stop()s before release_copy_files(); completion is
still reported via NFSD4_COPY_F_COMPLETED, so
nfsd4_has_active_async_copies() is unaffected. Each teardown caller
removes the copy from clp->async_copies first, so kthread_stop() runs
exactly once.
- Take a copy reference in nfsd4_send_cb_offload(), dropped in
nfsd4_cb_offload_release(). The kthread still holds its own reference
there, so the refcount_inc() cannot race the final free.
- Read cp_clp with smp_load_acquire() to pair with the unordered
set_bit()/clear_bit() writers (Documentation/atomic_bitops.rst).
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
- 0.4% 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