In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
gpiolib: cdev: Fix use after free in lineinfo_changed_notify
The use-after-free issue occurs as follows: when the GPIO chip device file
is being closed by invoking gpio_chrdev_release(), watched_lines is freed
by bitmap_free(), but the unregistration of lineinfo_changed_nb notifier
chain failed due to waiting write rwsem. Additionally, one of the GPIO
chip's lines is also in the release process and holds the notifier chain's
read rwsem. Consequently, a race condition leads to the use-after-free of
watched_lines.
Here is the typical stack when issue happened:
[free]
gpio_chrdev_release()
--> bitmap_free(cdev->watched_lines) <-- freed
--> blocking_notifier_chain_unregister()
--> down_write(&nh->rwsem) <-- waiting rwsem
--> __down_write_common()
--> rwsem_down_write_slowpath()
--> schedule_preempt_disabled()
--> schedule()
[use]
st54spi_gpio_dev_release()
--> gpio_free()
--> gpiod_free()
--> gpiod_free_commit()
--> gpiod_line_state_notify()
--> blocking_notifier_call_chain()
--> down_read(&nh->rwsem); <-- held rwsem
--> notifier_call_chain()
--> lineinfo_changed_notify()
--> test_bit(xxxx, cdev->watched_lines) <-- use after free
The side effect of the use-after-free issue is that a GPIO line event is
being generated for userspace where it shouldn't. However, since the chrdev
is being closed, userspace won't have the chance to read that event anyway.
To fix the issue, call the bitmap_free() function after the unregistration
of lineinfo_changed_nb notifier chain.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.0 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v3 · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-21). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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