In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
amt: re-read skb header pointers after every pull
Several AMT receive and transmit paths cache a pointer into the skb head
(ip_hdr(), ipv6_hdr(), eth_hdr() or the AMT message header) and then call
a helper that can reallocate that head before the cached pointer is used
again. pskb_may_pull(), ip_mc_may_pull(), ipv6_mc_may_pull(),
iptunnel_pull_header(), ip_mc_check_igmp() and ipv6_mc_check_mld() can all
free the old head and move the data, so a pointer taken before the call
dangles afterwards and the later access is a use-after-free of the freed
head.
The affected sites are:
amt_rcv() caches ip_hdr() before amt_parse_type() pulls, then reads
iph->saddr.
amt_dev_xmit() caches ip_hdr()/ipv6_hdr() before ip_mc_check_igmp()/
ipv6_mc_check_mld() and pskb_may_pull(), then reads the group address.
amt_multicast_data_handler() caches eth_hdr() before pskb_may_pull(),
then writes the L2 header.
amt_membership_query_handler() caches the AMT header, the outer and
inner eth_hdr() and ip_hdr() before iptunnel_pull_header() and several
pulls, then reads and writes them.
amt_igmpv3_report_handler() and amt_mldv2_report_handler() cache
ip_hdr()/ipv6_hdr() and the current group record and read the record
count from the report header inside the record loop, across the
*_mc_may_pull() calls.
amt_update_handler() caches ip_hdr() and the AMT membership-update
header before pskb_may_pull(), iptunnel_pull_header(),
ip_mc_check_igmp() and the report handler, then reads iph->daddr and
amtmu->nonce / amtmu->response_mac.
Fix each site by either snapshotting the scalar that is used after the
pull before the first pull runs, or re-deriving the header pointer from
the skb after the last pull that can move the head. Values that are
stable across the pull (source and group address, the response MAC and
nonce, the record count, the outer source MAC) are snapshotted; pointers
that are written through or read repeatedly are re-derived.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.5% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-19). 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