In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Check skb->transport_header is set in bpf_skb_check_mtu
The bpf_skb_check_mtu helper needs to use skb->transport_header when
the BPF_MTU_CHK_SEGS flag is used:
bpf_skb_check_mtu(skb, ifindex, &mtu_len, 0, BPF_MTU_CHK_SEGS)
The transport_header is not always set. There is a WARN_ON_ONCE
report when CONFIG_DEBUG_NET is enabled + skb->gso_size is set +
bpf_prog_test_run is used:
WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 2216 at ./include/linux/skbuff.h:3071
skb_gso_validate_network_len
bpf_skb_check_mtu
bpf_prog_3920e25740a41171_tc_chk_segs_flag # A test in the next patch
bpf_test_run
bpf_prog_test_run_skb
For a normal ingress skb (not test_run), skb_reset_transport_header
is performed but there is plan to avoid setting it as described in
commit 2170a1f09148 ("net: no longer reset transport_header in __netif_receive_skb_core()").
This patch fixes the bpf helper by checking
skb_transport_header_was_set(). The check is done just before
skb->transport_header is used, to avoid breaking the existing bpf prog.
The WARN_ON_ONCE is limited to bpf_prog_test_run, so targeting bpf-next.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA 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 BOD 26-04 block below.
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