In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
vxlan: mdb: Fix use-after-free in vxlan_mdb_remote_src_del()
vxlan_mdb_is_valid_source(), which validates MDBE_ATTR_SOURCE and every
MDBE_ATTR_SRC_LIST member, accepts the all-zeros address.
A source list is only accepted on a (*, G) entry, whose source is the
all-zeros address, and for each member of the list an (S, G) entry is
derived from it by substituting the source. Entries are keyed by a plain
memcmp() of struct vxlan_mdb_entry_key, so if MDBE_ATTR_SOURCE is present
and holds the all-zeros address and the source list holds it as well, the
derived (S, G) key is byte-identical to the (*, G) key and resolves to the
same entry. Omitting MDBE_ATTR_SOURCE is not equivalent, as the key is
then left with a zero address family.
vxlan_mdb_remote_src_del() removes the forwarding entry of a source before
freeing the source entry:
vxlan_mdb_remote_src_fwd_del(vxlan, group, remote, &ent->addr);
vxlan_mdb_remote_src_entry_del(ent);
With the keys aliased, the first call deletes the remote of the entry that
owns 'ent' instead of a separate (S, G) entry, and frees 'ent'. The second
call then runs on the freed entry, and its hlist_del() reads ->pprev and
->next out of it and writes through them.
Adding the (*, G) entry with NLM_F_REPLACE and no source list marks the
all-zeros source for deletion and reaches this from the sweep at the end
of vxlan_mdb_remote_srcs_replace().
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __vxlan_mdb_add+0x1cd/0xd70
Read of size 8 at addr ffff888102852500 by task poc/84
__vxlan_mdb_add+0x1cd/0xd70
vxlan_mdb_add+0xc0/0x140
rtnl_mdb_add+0x157/0x2a0
rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x207/0x5a0
Allocated by task 84:
__kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x153/0x360
vxlan_mdb_remote_srcs_add+0x2eb/0x440
__vxlan_mdb_add+0x803/0xd70
Freed by task 84:
kfree+0x14c/0x3b0
vxlan_mdb_remote_del+0x129/0x1a0
__vxlan_mdb_del+0x4f/0xe0
vxlan_mdb_remote_src_fwd_del.isra.0+0x162/0x1b0
__vxlan_mdb_add+0x1c5/0xd70
The MDB operations are netns-scoped, so an unprivileged user can perform
them in a new user and network namespace.
Reject the all-zeros address in vxlan_mdb_is_valid_source(), which covers
both call sites. A (*, G) entry is expressed by omitting the source, so
nothing legitimate is refused.
Discovered by XBOW, triaged by Baul Lee
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-31). 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