In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
Bluetooth: RFCOMM: hold listener socket in rfcomm_connect_ind()
rfcomm_get_sock_by_channel() scans rfcomm_sk_list under the list lock,
but returns the selected listener after dropping that lock without
taking a reference. rfcomm_connect_ind() then locks the listener,
queues a child socket on it, and may notify it after unlocking it.
The buggy scenario involves two paths, with each column showing the
order within that path:
rfcomm_connect_ind(): listener close:
- Find parent in 1. close() enters
rfcomm_get_sock_by_channel() rfcomm_sock_release().
- Drop rfcomm_sk_list.lock 2. rfcomm_sock_shutdown()
without pinning parent. closes the listener.
- Call lock_sock(parent) and 3. rfcomm_sock_kill()
bt_accept_enqueue(parent, unlinks and puts parent.
sk, true).
- Read parent flags and may 4. parent can be freed.
call sk_state_change().
If close wins the race, parent can be freed before
rfcomm_connect_ind() reaches lock_sock(), bt_accept_enqueue(), or the
deferred-setup callback.
Take a reference on the listener before leaving rfcomm_sk_list.lock.
After lock_sock() succeeds, recheck that it is still in BT_LISTEN
before queueing a child, cache the deferred-setup bit while the parent
is locked, and drop the reference after the last parent use.
KASAN reported a slab-use-after-free in lock_sock_nested() from
rfcomm_connect_ind(), with the freeing stack going through
rfcomm_sock_kill() and rfcomm_sock_release().
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.0 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. 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