In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
misc: fastrpc: Fix NULL pointer dereference in rpmsg callback
A NULL pointer dereference was observed on Hawi at boot when the DSP
sends a glink message before fastrpc_rpmsg_probe() has completed
initialization:
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000178
pc : _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x34/0x8c
lr : fastrpc_rpmsg_callback+0x3c/0xcc [fastrpc]
...
Call trace:
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x34/0x8c (P)
fastrpc_rpmsg_callback+0x3c/0xcc [fastrpc]
qcom_glink_native_rx+0x538/0x6a4
qcom_glink_smem_intr+0x14/0x24 [qcom_glink_smem]
The faulting address 0x178 corresponds to the lock variable inside
struct fastrpc_channel_ctx, confirming that cctx is NULL when
fastrpc_rpmsg_callback() attempts to take the spinlock.
There are two issues here. First, dev_set_drvdata() is called before
spin_lock_init() and idr_init(), leaving a window where the callback
can retrieve a valid cctx pointer but operate on an uninitialized
spinlock. Second, the rpmsg channel becomes live as soon as the driver
is bound, so fastrpc_rpmsg_callback() can fire before dev_set_drvdata()
is called at all, resulting in dev_get_drvdata() returning NULL.
Fix both issues by moving all cctx initialization ahead of
dev_set_drvdata() so the structure is fully initialized before it
becomes visible to the callback, and add a NULL check in
fastrpc_rpmsg_callback() as a guard against any remaining window.
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 2026-10-24). 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 (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