CVE-2026-98099

MEDIUMNVD 4.74.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

This medium-severity CVE scores 4.7 under NVD CVSS v3. EPSS exploit probability: <0.1% (below the 1st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from NVD CVSS v3
Sources: EPSS, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-86929 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

4.7EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: <0.1%CVSS: 4.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

ipv6: mcast: use rcu_assign_pointer() for __rcu list updates

Several places in net/ipv6/mcast.c update RCU-protected lists (np->ipv6_mc_list, idev->mc_list, idev->mc_tomb) using direct pointer assignments instead of rcu_assign_pointer():

  • In __ipv6_dev_mc_dec(), unlinking a group from idev->mc_list did:
*map = ma->next; without rcu_assign_pointer() while concurrent readers traverse idev->mc_list locklessly under rcu_read_lock().
  • In ipv6_sock_mc_drop() and __ipv6_sock_mc_close(), unlinking a group
from np->ipv6_mc_list directly assigned *lnk = mc_lst->next and np->ipv6_mc_list = mc_lst->next without rcu_assign_pointer(), racing with lockless readers in inet6_mc_check().
  • In __ipv6_sock_mc_join(), mc_lst->next was initialized to
np->ipv6_mc_list via raw assignment before publishing mc_lst.
  • In mld_del_delrec() and __ipv6_dev_mc_inc(), __rcu source pointers
passed into rcu_assign_pointer() lacked explicit dereference helpers.

Fix these by consistently using rcu_assign_pointer() along with mc_dereference() / sock_dereference().

CVSS v3
4.7
EG Score
4.7MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
21
EG Risk 21/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity47% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 4.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
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.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
<0.1%
EPSS %ILE
below the 1st
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (4.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
4.7 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

Published

September 25, 2026

Last Modified

October 28, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-98099(2)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (358 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (181 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (179 versions)
  • every version up to 7.2.7-1: fixed in 7.2.7-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 64× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 1 repeat row among the latest 79 is merged into the row it repeats.

  1. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  2. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  3. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  4. 2026-10-28 19:27 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 4.7 MEDIUM
  5. 2026-10-28 19:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  6. 2026-10-28 19:26 UTCNVD updateCVSS v3 → 4.7 · severity → MEDIUM
  7. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  8. 2026-10-27 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  9. 2026-10-26 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  10. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  11. 2026-10-25 13:47 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  13. 2026-10-23 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  14. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  15. 2026-10-21 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  16. 2026-10-21 14:31 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-10-21 14:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  18. 2026-10-21 14:27 UTCNVD update
  19. 2026-10-21 13:10 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-21 13:10 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-10-21 13:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  22. 2026-10-21 13:09 UTCMITRE cvelistV5
  23. 2026-10-20 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  24. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  25. 2026-10-19 10:37 UTCVendor advisory
Show 53 more
  1. 2026-10-19 10:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  2. 2026-10-19 10:25 UTCNVD update
  3. 2026-10-19 09:51 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-19 09:51 UTCVendor advisory
  5. 2026-10-19 09:51 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  6. 2026-10-19 09:39 UTCMITRE cvelistV5
  7. 2026-10-18 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  8. 2026-10-18 02:56 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  10. 2026-10-16 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  11. 2026-10-15 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  12. 2026-10-15 11:33 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  13. 2026-10-15 11:25 UTCNVD update
  14. 2026-10-15 10:33 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  15. 2026-10-15 10:27 UTCMITRE cvelistV5
  16. 2026-10-14 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  17. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  18. 2026-10-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  19. 2026-10-12 14:39 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-11 19:10 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-11 19:09 UTCVendor advisory
  22. 2026-10-11 19:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  23. 2026-10-11 16:25 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-10-11 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  25. 2026-10-11 13:37 UTCEG score recompute
  26. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  27. 2026-10-09 20:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  28. 2026-10-09 00:01 UTCVendor advisory
  29. 2026-10-09 00:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  30. 2026-10-08 17:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  31. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  32. 2026-10-06 15:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  33. 2026-10-06 04:53 UTCVendor advisory
  34. 2026-10-06 04:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  35. 2026-10-05 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  36. 2026-10-04 23:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  37. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  38. 2026-10-03 09:44 UTCVendor advisory
  39. 2026-10-03 09:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  40. 2026-10-02 17:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  41. 2026-10-01 19:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  42. 2026-09-30 15:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  43. 2026-09-30 14:34 UTCEG score recompute
  44. 2026-09-30 14:34 UTCVendor advisory
  45. 2026-09-30 14:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  46. 2026-09-28 13:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  47. 2026-09-28 06:39 UTCEG score recompute
  48. 2026-09-28 06:39 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5fxh-xwwm-73v4
  49. 2026-09-27 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  50. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  51. 2026-09-25 11:30 UTCNVD update
  52. 2026-09-25 10:27 UTCEG score recompute
  53. 2026-09-25 10:27 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-98099?
CVE-2026-98099 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 25, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: mcast: use rcu_assign_pointer() for __rcu list updates Several places in net/ipv6/mcast.c update RCU-protected lists (np->ipv6_mc_list, idev->mc_list, idev->mc_tomb) using direct pointer assignments instead of…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-98099 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-98099 was published on September 25, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 28, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-98099 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-98099 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a <0.1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (below the 1st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-98099?
CVE-2026-98099 has a CVSS v3 base score of 4.7 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-98099?
A fix for CVE-2026-98099 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-98099 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-98099

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-98099?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.