In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
firmware: stratix10-rsu: Fix NULL pointer dereference when RSU is disabled
When the Remote System Update (RSU) isn't enabled in the First Stage
Boot Loader (FSBL), the driver encounters a NULL pointer dereference when
excute svc_normal_to_secure_thread() thread, resulting in a kernel panic:
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000008
Mem abort info:
...
Data abort info:
...
[0000000000000008] user address but active_mm is swapper
Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000004 [#1] SMP
Modules linked in:
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 79 Comm: svc_smc_hvc_thr Not tainted 6.19.0-rc8-yocto-standard+ #59 PREEMPT
Hardware name: SoCFPGA Stratix 10 SoCDK (DT)
pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : svc_normal_to_secure_thread+0x38c/0x990
lr : svc_normal_to_secure_thread+0x144/0x990
...
Call trace:
svc_normal_to_secure_thread+0x38c/0x990 (P)
kthread+0x150/0x210
ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
Code: 97cfc113 f9400260 aa1403e1 f9400400 (f9400402)
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
The issue occurs because rsu_send_async_msg() fails when RSU is not enabled
in firmware, causing the channel to be freed via stratix10_svc_free_channel().
However, the probe function continues execution and registers
svc_normal_to_secure_thread(), which subsequently attempts to access the
already-freed channel, triggering the NULL pointer dereference.
Fix this by properly cleaning up the async client and returning early on
failure, preventing the thread from being used with an invalid channel.
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. 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