In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
xfrm6: fix uninitialized saddr in xfrm6_get_saddr()
xfrm6_get_saddr() does not check the return value of
ipv6_dev_get_saddr(). When ipv6_dev_get_saddr() fails to find a suitable
source address (returns -EADDRNOTAVAIL), saddr->in6 is left
uninitialized, but xfrm6_get_saddr() still returns 0 (success).
This causes the caller xfrm_tmpl_resolve_one() to use the uninitialized
address in xfrm_state_find(), triggering KMSAN warning:
=====================================================
BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in xfrm_state_find+0x2424/0xa940
xfrm_state_find+0x2424/0xa940
xfrm_resolve_and_create_bundle+0x906/0x5a20
xfrm_lookup_with_ifid+0xcc0/0x3770
xfrm_lookup_route+0x63/0x2b0
ip_route_output_flow+0x1ce/0x270
udp_sendmsg+0x2ce1/0x3400
inet_sendmsg+0x1ef/0x2a0
__sock_sendmsg+0x278/0x3d0
__sys_sendto+0x593/0x720
__x64_sys_sendto+0x130/0x200
x64_sys_call+0x332b/0x3e70
do_syscall_64+0xd3/0xf80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
Local variable tmp.i.i created at:
xfrm_resolve_and_create_bundle+0x3e3/0x5a20
xfrm_lookup_with_ifid+0xcc0/0x3770
=====================================================
Fix by checking the return value of ipv6_dev_get_saddr() and propagating
the error.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.6): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.6 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.6 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.4% 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; 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