In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
xprtrdma: Decrement re_receiving on the early exit paths
In the event that rpcrdma_post_recvs() fails to create a work request
(due to memory allocation failure, say) or otherwise exits early, we
should decrement ep->re_receiving before returning. Otherwise we will
hang in rpcrdma_xprt_drain() as re_receiving will never reach zero and
the completion will never be triggered.
On a system with high memory pressure, this can appear as the following
hung task:
INFO: task kworker/u385:17:8393 blocked for more than 122 seconds.
Tainted: G S E 6.19.0 #3
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:kworker/u385:17 state:D stack:0 pid:8393 tgid:8393 ppid:2 task_flags:0x4248060 flags:0x00080000
Workqueue: xprtiod xprt_autoclose [sunrpc]
Call Trace:
__schedule+0x48b/0x18b0
? ib_post_send_mad+0x247/0xae0 [ib_core]
schedule+0x27/0xf0
schedule_timeout+0x104/0x110
__wait_for_common+0x98/0x180
? __pfx_schedule_timeout+0x10/0x10
wait_for_completion+0x24/0x40
rpcrdma_xprt_disconnect+0x444/0x460 [rpcrdma]
xprt_rdma_close+0x12/0x40 [rpcrdma]
xprt_autoclose+0x5f/0x120 [sunrpc]
process_one_work+0x191/0x3e0
worker_thread+0x2e3/0x420
? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10
kthread+0x10d/0x230
? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork+0x273/0x2b0
? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.5 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