In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tracepoint: balance regfunc() on func_add() failure in tracepoint_add_func()
When a tracepoint goes through the 0 -> 1 transition, tracepoint_add_func()
invokes the subsystem's ext->regfunc() before attempting to install the
new probe via func_add(). If func_add() then fails (for example, when
allocate_probes() cannot allocate a new probe array under memory pressure
and returns -ENOMEM), the function returns the error without calling the
matching ext->unregfunc(), leaving the side effects of regfunc() behind
with no installed probe to justify them.
For syscall tracepoints this is particularly unpleasant: syscall_regfunc()
bumps sys_tracepoint_refcount and sets SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT on every task.
After a leaked failure, the refcount is stuck at a non-zero value with no
consumer, and every task continues paying the syscall trace entry/exit
overhead until reboot. Other subsystems providing regfunc()/unregfunc()
pairs exhibit similarly scoped persistent state.
Mirror the existing 1 -> 0 cleanup and call ext->unregfunc() in the
func_add() error path, gated on the same condition used there so the
unwind is symmetric with the registration.
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 2026-11-06). 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