In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
af_packet: Don't cast tpacket_hdr.tp_len to int in tpacket_parse_header().
syzbot reported BUG() in sock_sendmsg_nosec(). [0]
The problem is that tpacket_parse_header() casts user-provided
tpacket_hdr.tp_len, which is u32, to int.
If the length is larger than INT_MAX, the following condition
in tpacket_parse_header() passes,
if (unlikely(tp_len > size_max))
and any negative value can be returned to the caller, up to
sock_sendmsg_nosec().
The repro set tpacket_hdr.tp_len to 0xfffffdef, which is cast
to -EIOCBQUEUED (-529), triggering BUG() in sock_sendmsg_nosec().
*(uint64_t*)0x200000000008 = 0xfffffdef;
...
syscall(__NR_write, /*fd=*/r[0], /*buf=*/0x200000000000ul, /*count=*/1ul);
Let's define the local tp_len as u32 in tpacket_parse_header().
[0]:
kernel BUG at net/socket.c:803!
Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5628 Comm: syz-executor176 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 07/24/2026
RIP: 0010:sock_sendmsg_nosec+0x145/0x180 net/socket.c:803
Code: 06 67 48 0f b9 3a eb 95 e8 e8 3a 22 f8 48 89 df 4c 89 f6 4c 89 e2 4d 89 fb 2e e8 32 a5 5c 16 e9 51 ff ff ff e8 cc 3a 22 f8 90 <0f> 0b e8 c4 3a 22 f8 48 83 c3 18 48 89 d8 48 c1 e8 03 42 80 3c 28
RSP: 0018:ffffc90003aefb48 EFLAGS: 00010293
RAX: ffffffff89a578d4 RBX: ffff8880764c67c0 RCX: ffff88807fb23e80
RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00000000fffffdef RDI: 00000000fffffdef
RBP: 00000000fffffdef R08: ffffc90003aef747 R09: 1ffff9200075dee8
R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: fffff5200075dee9 R12: 0000000000000001
R13: dffffc0000000000 R14: ffffc90003aefbc0 R15: ffffffff8aac4310
FS: 000055559101b400(0000) GS:ffff888124ce0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 0000200000000210 CR3: 0000000073dca000 CR4: 00000000003526f0
Call Trace:
__sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:815 [inline]
sock_write_iter+0x2de/0x3e0 net/socket.c:1266
new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:595 [inline]
vfs_write+0x612/0xba0 fs/read_write.c:687
ksys_write+0x150/0x270 fs/read_write.c:739
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:61 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0x166/0x520 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:84
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
RIP: 0033:0x7f173130ecb9
Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
RSP: 002b:00007ffd67e44248 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000200000000000 RCX: 00007f173130ecb9
RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000200000000000 RDI: 0000000000000003
RBP: 0000000000000001 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007ffd67e44388
R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00002000000000c0 R15: 0000000000000002
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v3 · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. 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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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