In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
usb: gadget: f_midi: cancel pending IN work before freeing the midi object
The f_midi driver embeds a work item (midi->work) whose handler,
f_midi_in_work(), dereferences the enclosing struct f_midi through
container_of(). This work is armed from two sites: f_midi_complete(),
on a normal IN-endpoint completion, and f_midi_in_trigger(), on an ALSA
rawmidi output-stream start.
Neither f_midi_disable() nor f_midi_unbind() cancels midi->work.
f_midi_disable() only disables the endpoints and drains the in_req_fifo;
it does not synchronize the work item, and the sound card is released
asynchronously to the final free of the midi object.
The midi object is reference-counted (midi->free_ref) and is freed in
f_midi_free() only once both the usb_function reference and the rawmidi
private_data reference have been dropped. In f_midi_unbind(),
f_midi_disable() runs before the sound card is released, so while the
USB endpoints are already disabled the rawmidi device is still usable by
an open substream. A concurrent userspace write on such a substream can
reach f_midi_in_trigger() and queue midi->work again after
f_midi_disable() has returned. A work item armed this way may still be
pending when the last reference drops and f_midi_free() proceeds to
kfree(midi), letting f_midi_in_work() dereference the struct after it
has been freed, a use-after-free.
For this reason cancelling midi->work in f_midi_disable() would not be
sufficient: the ALSA trigger path can rearm the work after disable()
returns. Cancelling at the refcount-zero free site is the boundary
after which neither arming source can survive, because by then both
references that keep the midi object alive have been dropped: the USB
endpoints are already disabled and the rawmidi device has been released.
Fix this by calling cancel_work_sync(&midi->work) in the refcount-zero
block of f_midi_free(), before the embedded work_struct is freed along
with the rest of the structure. opts->lock is a sleeping mutex, so
calling cancel_work_sync() under it is permitted, and the handler takes
midi->transmit_lock rather than opts->lock, so no self-deadlock can
occur while it waits for a running instance of the work to finish.
This issue was found by an in-house static analysis tool.
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 2026-10-17). 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