In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
binder: fix UAF in binder_thread_release()
When a thread exits, binder_thread_release() walks its transaction stack
to clear the t->from and t->to_proc that correspond with the exiting
thread. However, a process dying in parallel might attempt to kfree some
of these transactions. And if one of them has no associated t->to_proc,
the t->to_proc->inner_lock will not be acquired.
This means that transaction accesses in binder_thread_release() after
t->to_proc has been cleared might race with binder_free_transaction()
and cause a use-after-free error as reported by KASAN:
==================================================================
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in binder_thread_release+0x5d0/0x798
Write of size 8 at addr ffff000016627500 by task X/715
CPU: 17 UID: 0 PID: 715 Comm: X Not tainted 7.1.0-rc5-00149-g8fde5d1d47f6 #30 PREEMPT
Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
Call trace:
binder_thread_release+0x5d0/0x798
binder_ioctl+0x12c0/0x299c
[...]
Allocated by task 717 on cpu 18 at 67.267803s:
__kasan_kmalloc+0xa0/0xbc
__kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x174/0x444
binder_transaction+0x554/0x8150
binder_thread_write+0xa30/0x4354
binder_ioctl+0x20f0/0x299c
[...]
Freed by task 202 on cpu 18 at 90.416221s:
__kasan_slab_free+0x58/0x80
kfree+0x1a0/0x4a4
binder_free_transaction+0x150/0x294
binder_send_failed_reply+0x398/0x6d8
binder_release_work+0x3e4/0x4ec
binder_deferred_func+0xbd8/0x104c
[...]
==================================================================
In order to avoid this, make sure that binder_free_transaction() reads
the t->to_proc under the transaction lock. This will serialize the
transaction release with the accesses in binder_thread_release(). Plus,
it matches the documented locking rules for @to_proc.
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 2026-11-12). 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, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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.
The score's inputs: 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