In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
dcache: Limit the minimal number of bucket to two
There is an OOB read problem on dentry_hashtable when user sets
'dhash_entries=1':
BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffff888b30b774b0
#PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
#PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI
RIP: 0010:__d_lookup+0x56/0x120
Call Trace:
d_lookup.cold+0x16/0x5d
lookup_dcache+0x27/0xf0
lookup_one_qstr_excl+0x2a/0x180
start_dirop+0x55/0xa0
simple_start_creating+0x8d/0xa0
debugfs_start_creating+0x8c/0x180
debugfs_create_dir+0x1d/0x1c0
pinctrl_init+0x6d/0x140
do_one_initcall+0x6d/0x3d0
kernel_init_freeable+0x39f/0x460
kernel_init+0x2a/0x260
There will be only one bucket in dentry_hashtable when dhash_entries is
set as one, and d_hash_shift is calculated as 32 by dcache_init(). Then,
following process will access more than one buckets(which memory region
is not allocated) in dentry_hashtable:
d_lookup
b = d_hash(hash)
dentry_hashtable + ((u32)hashlen >> d_hash_shift)
// The C standard defines the behavior of right shift amounts
// exceeding the bit width of the operand as undefined. The
// result of '(u32)hashlen >> d_hash_shift' becomes 'hashlen',
// so 'b' will point to an unallocated memory region.
hlist_bl_for_each_entry_rcu(b)
hlist_bl_first_rcu(head)
h->first // read OOB!
Fix it by limiting the minimal number of dentry_hashtable bucket to two,
so that 'd_hash_shift' won't exceeds the bit width of type u32.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.1 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.5% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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