In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Fix constant blinding for PROBE_MEM32 stores
BPF_ST | BPF_PROBE_MEM32 immediate stores are not handled by
bpf_jit_blind_insn(), allowing user-controlled 32-bit immediates to
survive unblinded into JIT-compiled native code when bpf_jit_harden >= 1.
The root cause is that convert_ctx_accesses() rewrites BPF_ST|BPF_MEM
to BPF_ST|BPF_PROBE_MEM32 for arena pointer stores during verification,
before bpf_jit_blind_constants() runs during JIT compilation. The
blinding switch only matches BPF_ST|BPF_MEM (mode 0x60), not
BPF_ST|BPF_PROBE_MEM32 (mode 0xa0). The instruction falls through
unblinded.
Add BPF_ST|BPF_PROBE_MEM32 cases to bpf_jit_blind_insn() alongside the
existing BPF_ST|BPF_MEM cases. The blinding transformation is identical:
load the blinded immediate into BPF_REG_AX via mov+xor, then convert
the immediate store to a register store (BPF_STX).
The rewritten STX instruction must preserve the BPF_PROBE_MEM32 mode so
the architecture JIT emits the correct arena addressing (R12-based on
x86-64). Cannot use the BPF_STX_MEM() macro here because it hardcodes
BPF_MEM mode; construct the instruction directly instead.
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
- 0.1% 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