In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: bridge: xmit: make sure we have at least eth header len bytes
syzbot triggered an uninit value[1] error in bridge device's xmit path
by sending a short (less than ETH_HLEN bytes) skb. To fix it check if
we can actually pull that amount instead of assuming.
Tested with dropwatch:
drop at: br_dev_xmit+0xb93/0x12d0 [bridge] (0xffffffffc06739b3)
origin: software
timestamp: Mon May 13 11:31:53 2024 778214037 nsec
protocol: 0x88a8
length: 2
original length: 2
drop reason: PKT_TOO_SMALL
[1]
BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in br_dev_xmit+0x61d/0x1cb0 net/bridge/br_device.c:65
br_dev_xmit+0x61d/0x1cb0 net/bridge/br_device.c:65
__netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4903 [inline]
netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4917 [inline]
xmit_one net/core/dev.c:3531 [inline]
dev_hard_start_xmit+0x247/0xa20 net/core/dev.c:3547
__dev_queue_xmit+0x34db/0x5350 net/core/dev.c:4341
dev_queue_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:3091 [inline]
__bpf_tx_skb net/core/filter.c:2136 [inline]
__bpf_redirect_common net/core/filter.c:2180 [inline]
__bpf_redirect+0x14a6/0x1620 net/core/filter.c:2187
____bpf_clone_redirect net/core/filter.c:2460 [inline]
bpf_clone_redirect+0x328/0x470 net/core/filter.c:2432
___bpf_prog_run+0x13fe/0xe0f0 kernel/bpf/core.c:1997
__bpf_prog_run512+0xb5/0xe0 kernel/bpf/core.c:2238
bpf_dispatcher_nop_func include/linux/bpf.h:1234 [inline]
__bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:657 [inline]
bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:664 [inline]
bpf_test_run+0x499/0xc30 net/bpf/test_run.c:425
bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x14ea/0x1f20 net/bpf/test_run.c:1058
bpf_prog_test_run+0x6b7/0xad0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4269
__sys_bpf+0x6aa/0xd90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5678
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5767 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5765 [inline]
__x64_sys_bpf+0xa0/0xe0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5765
x64_sys_call+0x96b/0x3b50 arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_64.h:322
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x1e0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 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 2026-10-20). 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