In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: reenable NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM offload for BIG TCP packets
The blamed commit disabled hardware offoad of IPv6 packets with
extension headers on devices that advertise NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM,
based on the definition of that feature in skbuff.h:
* * - %NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM
* - Driver (device) is only able to checksum plain
* TCP or UDP packets over IPv6. These are specifically
* unencapsulated packets of the form IPv6|TCP or
* IPv6|UDP where the Next Header field in the IPv6
* header is either TCP or UDP. IPv6 extension headers
* are not supported with this feature. This feature
* cannot be set in features for a device with
* NETIF_F_HW_CSUM also set. This feature is being
* DEPRECATED (see below).
The change causes skb_warn_bad_offload to fire for BIG TCP
packets.
[ 496.310233] WARNING: CPU: 13 PID: 23472 at net/core/dev.c:3129 skb_warn_bad_offload+0xc4/0xe0
[ 496.310297] ? skb_warn_bad_offload+0xc4/0xe0
[ 496.310300] skb_checksum_help+0x129/0x1f0
[ 496.310303] skb_csum_hwoffload_help+0x150/0x1b0
[ 496.310306] validate_xmit_skb+0x159/0x270
[ 496.310309] validate_xmit_skb_list+0x41/0x70
[ 496.310312] sch_direct_xmit+0x5c/0x250
[ 496.310317] __qdisc_run+0x388/0x620
BIG TCP introduced an IPV6_TLV_JUMBO IPv6 extension header to
communicate packet length, as this is an IPv6 jumbogram. But, the
feature is only enabled on devices that support BIG TCP TSO. The
header is only present for PF_PACKET taps like tcpdump, and not
transmitted by physical devices.
For this specific case of extension headers that are not
transmitted, return to the situation before the blamed commit
and support hardware offload.
ipv6_has_hopopt_jumbo() tests not only whether this header is present,
but also that it is the only extension header before a terminal (L4)
header.
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
- 0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-25). 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