In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
padata: do not leak refcount in reorder_work
A recent patch that addressed a UAF introduced a reference count leak:
the parallel_data refcount is incremented unconditionally, regardless
of the return value of queue_work(). If the work item is already queued,
the incremented refcount is never decremented.
Fix this by checking the return value of queue_work() and decrementing
the refcount when necessary.
Resolves:
Unreferenced object 0xffff9d9f421e3d80 (size 192):
comm "cryptomgr_probe", pid 157, jiffies 4294694003
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
80 8b cf 41 9f 9d ff ff b8 97 e0 89 ff ff ff ff ...A............
d0 97 e0 89 ff ff ff ff 19 00 00 00 1f 88 23 00 ..............#.
backtrace (crc 838fb36):
__kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x284/0x320
padata_alloc_pd+0x20/0x1e0
padata_alloc_shell+0x3b/0xa0
0xffffffffc040a54d
cryptomgr_probe+0x43/0xc0
kthread+0xf6/0x1f0
ret_from_fork+0x2f/0x50
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
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 2026-11-05). 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, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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.
The score's inputs: 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