In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mt76: mt7921: don't assume adequate headroom for SDIO headers
mt7921_usb_sdio_tx_prepare_skb() calls mt7921_usb_sdio_write_txwi() and
mt7921_skb_add_usb_sdio_hdr(), both of which blindly assume that
adequate headroom will be available in the passed skb. This assumption
typically is satisfied when the skb was allocated in the net core for
transmission via the mt7921 netdev (although even that is only an
optimization and is not strictly guaranteed), but the assumption is
sometimes not satisfied when the skb originated in the receive path of
another netdev and was passed through to the mt7921, such as by the
bridge layer. Blindly prepending bytes to an skb is always wrong.
This commit introduces a call to skb_cow_head() before the call to
mt7921_usb_sdio_write_txwi() in mt7921_usb_sdio_tx_prepare_skb() to
ensure that at least MT_SDIO_TXD_SIZE + MT_SDIO_HDR_SIZE bytes can be
pushed onto the skb.
Without this fix, I can trivially cause kernel panics by bridging an
MT7921AU-based USB 802.11ax interface with an Ethernet interface on an
Intel Atom-based x86 system using its onboard RTL8169 PCI Ethernet
adapter and also on an ARM-based Raspberry Pi 1 using its onboard
SMSC9512 USB Ethernet adapter. Note that the panics do not occur in
every system configuration, as they occur only if the receiving netdev
leaves less headroom in its received skbs than the mt7921 needs for its
SDIO headers.
Here is an example stack trace of this panic on Raspberry Pi OS Lite
2023-02-21 running kernel 6.1.24+ [1]:
skb_panic from skb_push+0x44/0x48
skb_push from mt7921_usb_sdio_tx_prepare_skb+0xd4/0x190 [mt7921_common]
mt7921_usb_sdio_tx_prepare_skb [mt7921_common] from mt76u_tx_queue_skb+0x94/0x1d0 [mt76_usb]
mt76u_tx_queue_skb [mt76_usb] from __mt76_tx_queue_skb+0x4c/0xc8 [mt76]
__mt76_tx_queue_skb [mt76] from mt76_txq_schedule.part.0+0x13c/0x398 [mt76]
mt76_txq_schedule.part.0 [mt76] from mt76_txq_schedule_all+0x24/0x30 [mt76]
mt76_txq_schedule_all [mt76] from mt7921_tx_worker+0x58/0xf4 [mt7921_common]
mt7921_tx_worker [mt7921_common] from __mt76_worker_fn+0x9c/0xec [mt76]
__mt76_worker_fn [mt76] from kthread+0xbc/0xe0
kthread from ret_from_fork+0x14/0x34
After this fix, bridging the mt7921 interface works fine on both of my
previously problematic systems.
[1] https://github.com/raspberrypi/firmware/tree/5c276f55a4b21345cd4d6200a504ee991851ff7a
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-30). 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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (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)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 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