In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netlink: terminate outstanding dump on socket close
Netlink supports iterative dumping of data. It provides the families
the following ops:
- start - (optional) kicks off the dumping process
- dump - actual dump helper, keeps getting called until it returns 0
- done - (optional) pairs with .start, can be used for cleanup
The whole process is asynchronous and the repeated calls to .dump
don't actually happen in a tight loop, but rather are triggered
in response to recvmsg() on the socket.
This gives the user full control over the dump, but also means that
the user can close the socket without getting to the end of the dump.
To make sure .start is always paired with .done we check if there
is an ongoing dump before freeing the socket, and if so call .done.
The complication is that sockets can get freed from BH and .done
is allowed to sleep. So we use a workqueue to defer the call, when
needed.
Unfortunately this does not work correctly. What we defer is not
the cleanup but rather releasing a reference on the socket.
We have no guarantee that we own the last reference, if someone
else holds the socket they may release it in BH and we're back
to square one.
The whole dance, however, appears to be unnecessary. Only the user
can interact with dumps, so we can clean up when socket is closed.
And close always happens in process context. Some async code may
still access the socket after close, queue notification skbs to it etc.
but no dumps can start, end or otherwise make progress.
Delete the workqueue and flush the dump state directly from the release
handler. Note that further cleanup is possible in -next, for instance
we now always call .done before releasing the main module reference,
so dump doesn't have to take a reference of its own.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-07). 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