In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
misc: fastrpc: fix use-after-free of fastrpc_user in workqueue context
There is a race between fastrpc_device_release() and the workqueue
that processes DSP responses. When the user closes the file descriptor,
fastrpc_device_release() frees the fastrpc_user structure. Concurrently,
an in-flight DSP invocation can complete and fastrpc_rpmsg_callback()
schedules context cleanup via schedule_work(&ctx->put_work). If the
workqueue runs fastrpc_context_free() in parallel with or after
fastrpc_device_release() has freed the user structure, it dereferences
the freed fastrpc_user. Depending on the state of the context at the
time of the race, any one of the following accesses can be hit:
- fastrpc_buf_free() calls fastrpc_ipa_to_dma_addr(buf->fl->cctx, ...)
to strip the SID bits from the stored IOVA before passing the
physical address to dma_free_coherent().
- fastrpc_free_map() reads map->fl->cctx->vmperms[0].vmid to
reconstruct the source permission bitmask needed for the
qcom_scm_assign_mem() call that returns memory from the DSP VM
back to HLOS.
- fastrpc_free_map() acquires map->fl->lock to safely remove the
map node from the fl->maps list.
The resulting use-after-free manifests as:
pc : fastrpc_buf_free+0x38/0x80 [fastrpc]
lr : fastrpc_context_free+0xa8/0x1b0 [fastrpc]
fastrpc_context_free+0xa8/0x1b0 [fastrpc]
fastrpc_context_put_wq+0x78/0xa0 [fastrpc]
process_one_work+0x180/0x450
worker_thread+0x26c/0x388
Add kref-based reference counting to fastrpc_user. Have each invoke
context take a reference on the user at allocation time and release it
when the context is freed. Release the initial reference in
fastrpc_device_release() at file close. Move the teardown of the user
structure — freeing pending contexts, maps, mmaps, and the channel
context reference — into the kref release callback fastrpc_user_free(),
so that it runs only when the last reference is dropped, regardless of
whether that happens at device close or after the final in-flight
context completes.
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 (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