In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
l2tp: use list_del_rcu in l2tp_session_unhash
An unprivileged local user can pin a host CPU indefinitely in
l2tp_session_get_by_ifname() by issuing L2TP_CMD_SESSION_GET on
L2TP_ATTR_IFNAME concurrently with L2TP_CMD_SESSION_CREATE and
L2TP_CMD_SESSION_DELETE on the same tunnel. All three commands take
GENL_UNS_ADMIN_PERM, so CAP_NET_ADMIN in the netns user namespace
suffices; on any host that has l2tp_core loaded the trigger is
reachable from a standard unshare -Urn sandbox.
l2tp_session_unhash() removes a session from tunnel->session_list
with list_del_init(), but that list is walked by
l2tp_session_get_by_ifname() with list_for_each_entry_rcu() under
rcu_read_lock_bh(). list_del_init() leaves the deleted entry's
next/prev self-pointing; a reader that has loaded the entry and
then advances pos->list.next reads &session->list, container_of()s
back to the same session, and list_for_each_entry_rcu() never
reaches the list head. The CPU stays in strcmp() inside the
walker, with BH and preemption disabled, so RCU grace periods on
the host stall behind it and the wedged thread cannot be killed
(SIGKILL is delivered on syscall return).
Use list_del_rcu() to match the existing list_add_rcu() in
l2tp_session_register(); the deleted session remains visible to
in-flight walkers with consistent next/prev pointers until
kfree_rcu() in l2tp_session_free() releases it. tunnel->session_list
has exactly one list_del_init() call site; the list_del_init
(&session->clist) at l2tp_core.c:533 operates on the per-collision
list, which is not walked under RCU. list_empty(&session->list) is
not used anywhere in net/l2tp/ after the unhash point, so dropping
the post-delete self-init is safe; the fix has no userspace-visible
behavior change.
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