In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfilter: nf_tables: fix dst corruption in same register operation
For lshift and rshift, the shift operations are performed in a loop over
32-bit words. The loop calculates the shifted value and write it to dst,
and then immediately reads from src to calculate the carry for the next
iteration. Because src and dst could point to the same memory location,
the carry is incorrectly calculated using the newly modified dst value
instead of the original src value.
Adding a temporary local variable to cache the original value before
writing to dst and using it for the carry calculation solves the
problem. In addition, partial overlap is rejected from control plane for
all kind of operations including byteorder. This was tested with the
following bytecode:
table test_table ip flags 0 use 1 handle 1
ip test_table test_chain use 3 type filter hook input prio 0 policy accept packets 0 bytes 0 flags 1
ip test_table test_chain 2
[ immediate reg 1 0x44332211 0x88776655 ]
[ bitwise reg 1 = ( reg 1 << 0x08000000 ) ]
[ cmp eq reg 1 0x66443322 0x00887766 ]
[ counter pkts 0 bytes 0 ]
ip test_table test_chain 4 3
[ immediate reg 1 0x44332211 0x88776655 ]
[ bitwise reg 1 = ( reg 1 << 0x08000000 ) ]
[ cmp eq reg 1 0x55443322 0x00887766 ]
[ counter pkts 21794 bytes 1917798 ]
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