In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Use RCU-safe iteration in dev_map_redirect_multi() SKB path
The DEVMAP_HASH branch in dev_map_redirect_multi() uses
hlist_for_each_entry_safe() to iterate hash buckets, but this function
runs under RCU protection (called from xdp_do_generic_redirect_map()
in softirq context). Concurrent writers (__dev_map_hash_update_elem,
dev_map_hash_delete_elem) modify the list using RCU primitives
(hlist_add_head_rcu, hlist_del_rcu).
hlist_for_each_entry_safe() performs plain pointer dereferences without
rcu_dereference(), missing the acquire barrier needed to pair with
writers' rcu_assign_pointer(). On weakly-ordered architectures (ARM64,
POWER), a reader can observe a partially-constructed node. It also
defeats CONFIG_PROVE_RCU lockdep validation and KCSAN data-race
detection.
Replace with hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() using rcu_read_lock_bh_held()
as the lockdep condition, consistent with the rcu_dereference_check()
used in the DEVMAP (non-hash) branch of the same functions. Also fix
the same incorrect lockdep_is_held(&dtab->index_lock) condition in
dev_map_enqueue_multi(), where the lock is not held either.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-24). 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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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