In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
iommufd: Fix race during abort for file descriptors
fput() doesn't actually call file_operations release() synchronously, it
puts the file on a work queue and it will be released eventually.
This is normally fine, except for iommufd the file and the iommufd_object
are tied to gether. The file has the object as it's private_data and holds
a users refcount, while the object is expected to remain alive as long as
the file is.
When the allocation of a new object aborts before installing the file it
will fput() the file and then go on to immediately kfree() the obj. This
causes a UAF once the workqueue completes the fput() and tries to
decrement the users refcount.
Fix this by putting the core code in charge of the file lifetime, and call
__fput_sync() during abort to ensure that release() is called before
kfree. __fput_sync() is a bit too tricky to open code in all the object
implementations. Instead the objects tell the core code where the file
pointer is and the core will take care of the life cycle.
If the object is successfully allocated then the file will hold a users
refcount and the iommufd_object cannot be destroyed.
It is worth noting that close(); ioctl(IOMMU_DESTROY); doesn't have an
issue because close() is already using a synchronous version of fput().
The UAF looks like this:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in iommufd_eventq_fops_release+0x45/0xc0 drivers/iommu/iommufd/eventq.c:376
Write of size 4 at addr ffff888059c97804 by task syz.0.46/6164
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6164 Comm: syz.0.46 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 08/18/2025
Call Trace:
__dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
print_address_description mm/kasan/report.c:378 [inline]
print_report+0xcd/0x630 mm/kasan/report.c:482
kasan_report+0xe0/0x110 mm/kasan/report.c:595
check_region_inline mm/kasan/generic.c:183 [inline]
kasan_check_range+0x100/0x1b0 mm/kasan/generic.c:189
instrument_atomic_read_write include/linux/instrumented.h:96 [inline]
atomic_fetch_sub_release include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h:400 [inline]
__refcount_dec include/linux/refcount.h:455 [inline]
refcount_dec include/linux/refcount.h:476 [inline]
iommufd_eventq_fops_release+0x45/0xc0 drivers/iommu/iommufd/eventq.c:376
__fput+0x402/0xb70 fs/file_table.c:468
task_work_run+0x14d/0x240 kernel/task_work.c:227
resume_user_mode_work include/linux/resume_user_mode.h:50 [inline]
exit_to_user_mode_loop+0xeb/0x110 kernel/entry/common.c:43
exit_to_user_mode_prepare include/linux/irq-entry-common.h:225 [inline]
syscall_exit_to_user_mode_work include/linux/entry-common.h:175 [inline]
syscall_exit_to_user_mode include/linux/entry-common.h:210 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0x41c/0x4c0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:100
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 (7.0): 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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-27). 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: 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.
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