CVE-2026-63894

HIGHPre-NVD 7.87.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 7.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-07-19. The CNA's CVSS baseline 7.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: the CNA's CVSS, EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory
Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-45667 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 7.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

usb: gadget: f_fs: serialize DMABUF cancel against request completion

ffs_epfile_dmabuf_io_complete() calls usb_ep_free_request() on the completed request but leaves priv->req, the back-pointer that ffs_dmabuf_transfer() set on submission, pointing at the freed memory. A later FUNCTIONFS_DMABUF_DETACH ioctl or ffs_epfile_release() on the close path still sees priv->req non-NULL under ffs->eps_lock:

if (priv->ep && priv->req) usb_ep_dequeue(priv->ep, priv->req);

so usb_ep_dequeue() is called on a freed usb_request.

On dummy_hcd the dequeue path only walks a live queue and pointer-compares, so the freed pointer reads without faulting and KASAN requires an explicit check at the FunctionFS call site to surface the use-after-free. On SG-capable in-tree UDCs the dequeue path dereferences the supplied request immediately:

* chipidea's ep_dequeue() does container_of(req, struct ci_hw_req, req) and reads hwreq->req.status before acquiring its own lock. * cdnsp's cdnsp_gadget_ep_dequeue() reads request->status first.

The narrower option of clearing priv->req via cmpxchg() in the completion does not close the race: the completion runs without eps_lock, so a cancel path holding eps_lock can still observe priv->req non-NULL, race a concurrent completion that clears and frees, and pass the freed pointer to usb_ep_dequeue(). A slightly longer fix that moves the free into the cleanup work is needed.

Same class of lifetime race as the recent usbip-vudc timer fix [1].

Take eps_lock in the sole place that mutates priv->req from the callback direction by moving usb_ep_free_request() out of the completion into ffs_dmabuf_cleanup(), the existing work handler scheduled by ffs_dmabuf_signal_done() on ffs->io_completion_wq. Clear priv->req there under eps_lock before freeing, and only clear if priv->req still names our request (a subsequent ffs_dmabuf_transfer() on the same attachment may have queued a new one).

This keeps the existing dummy_hcd sync-dequeue invariant: the completion callback is still invoked by the UDC without eps_lock held (dummy_hcd drops its own lock before calling the callback), and the callback now takes no f_fs lock at all. Serialization against the cancel path happens in cleanup, which runs from the workqueue with no f_fs lock held on entry.

The priv ref count protects the containing ffs_dmabuf_priv: ffs_dmabuf_transfer() takes a ref via ffs_dmabuf_get(), cleanup drops it via ffs_dmabuf_put(), so priv stays live for the cleanup even after the cancel path's list_del + ffs_dmabuf_put.

The ffs_dmabuf_transfer() error path no longer frees usb_req inline: fence->req and fence->ep are set before usb_ep_queue(), so ffs_dmabuf_cleanup() (scheduled by the error-path ffs_dmabuf_signal_done()) owns the free regardless of whether the queue succeeded.

Reproduced under KASAN on both detach and close paths against dummy_hcd with an observability hook (kasan_check_byte(priv->req) immediately before usb_ep_dequeue) at the two FunctionFS cancel sites to surface the stale-pointer access; the hook is not part of this patch. The KASAN allocator / free stacks in the captured splats identify the same request: alloc in dummy_alloc_request, free in dummy_timer, fault reached from ffs_epfile_release (close) and from the FUNCTIONFS_DMABUF_DETACH ioctl (detach). With the patch applied, both paths are silent under the same hook.

The bug is reached from the FunctionFS device node, which in real deployments is owned by the privileged gadget daemon (adbd, UMS, composite gadget services, etc.); it is not reachable from unprivileged userspace or from a USB host on the cable. FunctionFS mounts default to GLOBAL_ROOT_UID, but the filesystem supports uid=, gid=, and fmode= delegation to a non-root gadget daemon, so on real deployments the attacker may be a less-privileged service rather than root.

CVSS v3
7.8
EG Score
7.8HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
35
EG Risk 35/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity78% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
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.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
6th
KEV
Not listed

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
0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-27). 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

Published

July 19, 2026

Last Modified

August 5, 2026

Advisory Details (4)

Auto-updated Jul 21, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

usb: gadget: f_fs: serialize DMABUF cancel against request completion - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c872d8a065b3b499ce4c3ad168b5d34b68524f66
Web page

usb: gadget: f_fs: serialize DMABUF cancel against request completion - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c7d421123b98d5e9c1c84bd9957aba36f1cbb4ca
Web page

usb: gadget: f_fs: serialize DMABUF cancel against request completion - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/552dae28dbeb5f7c4fafcda43962dc46569f58a0
Web page

usb: gadget: f_fs: serialize DMABUF cancel against request completion - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2796646f6d892c1eb6818c7ca41fdfa12568e8d1

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-63894(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(8)

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(2 across 2 ecosystems)
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.38-1 ... 6.12.94-1~bpo12+1 (27 versions)
  • every version up to 6.12.94-1: fixed in 6.12.94-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.0.9-1~bpo13+1 (142 versions)
  • every version up to 7.0.12-1: fixed in 7.0.12-1
—

All Vendor Advisories

(8)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 11× in last 7d / 46× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 322 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 222 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  2. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  3. 2026-10-27 19:43 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-27 19:43 UTCVendor advisory
  5. 2026-10-27 19:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  6. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  7. 2026-10-26 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  8. 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 14:13 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  11. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  12. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  13. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  14. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  15. 2026-10-20 09:15 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-20 09:15 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-10-20 09:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  18. 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  19. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  20. 2026-10-18 03:23 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  22. 2026-10-16 16:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  23. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  24. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  25. 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-13 11:50 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-13 11:50 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  3. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  4. 2026-10-12 15:48 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-11 19:33 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 16:48 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 14:09 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  9. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  10. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  11. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  12. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  13. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  14. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  15. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  16. 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  17. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  18. 2026-10-01 08:55 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-01 08:55 UTCVendor advisory
  20. 2026-10-01 08:55 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  21. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  22. 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  23. 2026-09-28 07:33 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-09-28 07:33 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-09-28 07:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  26. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  27. 2026-09-24 04:15 UTCEG score recompute
  28. 2026-09-24 04:15 UTCVendor advisory
  29. 2026-09-24 04:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  30. 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  31. 2026-09-23 02:10 UTCEG score recompute
  32. 2026-09-23 02:10 UTCVendor advisory
  33. 2026-09-23 02:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  34. 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  35. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  36. 2026-09-18 04:23 UTCEG score recompute
  37. 2026-09-18 04:23 UTCVendor advisory
  38. 2026-09-18 04:23 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  39. 2026-09-17 10:00 UTCEG score recompute
  40. 2026-09-17 10:00 UTCVendor advisory
  41. 2026-09-17 10:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  42. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  43. 2026-09-16 13:07 UTCEG score recompute
  44. 2026-09-16 13:07 UTCVendor advisory
  45. 2026-09-16 13:07 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  46. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  47. 2026-09-14 10:52 UTCVendor advisory
  48. 2026-09-14 10:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  49. 2026-09-13 23:00 UTCEG score recompute
  50. 2026-09-13 23:00 UTCVendor advisory
  51. 2026-09-13 23:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  52. 2026-09-13 09:00 UTCVendor advisory
  53. 2026-09-13 09:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  54. 2026-09-12 21:28 UTCEG score recompute
  55. 2026-09-12 21:28 UTCVendor advisory
  56. 2026-09-12 21:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  57. 2026-09-12 07:20 UTCVendor advisory
  58. 2026-09-12 07:20 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  59. 2026-09-11 19:41 UTCEG score recompute
  60. 2026-09-11 19:41 UTCVendor advisory
  61. 2026-09-11 19:41 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  62. 2026-09-11 14:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  63. 2026-09-11 09:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  64. 2026-09-08 22:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  65. 2026-09-07 23:31 UTCEG score recompute
  66. 2026-09-07 23:31 UTCVendor advisory
  67. 2026-09-07 23:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  68. 2026-09-07 16:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  69. 2026-09-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  70. 2026-09-06 13:03 UTCVendor advisory
  71. 2026-09-06 13:03 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  72. 2026-09-05 20:11 UTCEG score recompute
  73. 2026-09-05 20:11 UTCVendor advisory
  74. 2026-09-05 20:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xh4m-2r9c-xfr3 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  75. 2026-09-05 15:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-63894?
CVE-2026-63894 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on July 19, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: gadget: f_fs: serialize DMABUF cancel against request completion ffsepfiledmabufiocomplete() calls usbepfree_request() on the completed request but leaves priv->req, the back-pointer that ffsdmabuftransfer() set on submission,…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-63894 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-63894 was published on July 19, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of August 5, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-63894 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-63894 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (6th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-63894?
CVE-2026-63894 has a CVSS base score of 7.8 (the CNA's own assessment, by linux; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-63894?
A fix for CVE-2026-63894 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-63894 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-63894

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-63894?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.