In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fs/resctrl: Fix use-after-free during unmount
During unmount or failure teardown all mon_data structures that contain
monitoring event file private data are freed after which kernfs nodes are
removed. However, the RDT_DELETED flag is never set for the statically
allocated default resource group.
A concurrent reader of an event file associated with the default resource
group may, after dropping kernfs active protection, block on rdtgroup_mutex
while unmount proceeds to free the file private data and destroy the kernfs
node without waiting for the reader.
When the mutex is released, the reader wakes up, observes that RDT_DELETED
is not set for the default group, and dereferences the already-freed
file private data.
The scenario can be depicted as follows:
CPU0 CPU1
/*
* Default resource group's
* monitoring data accessible via
* kernfs file with kernfs_node::priv
* pointing to a struct mon_data.
* User opens the file for reading.
*/
rdtgroup_mondata_show() /* arch encounters fatal error */
rdtgroup_kn_lock_live() resctrl_exit()
atomic_inc(&rdtgroup_default.waitcount) cpus_read_lock()
kernfs_break_active_protection(kn) mutex_lock(&rdtgroup_mutex)
cpus_read_lock() resctrl_fs_teardown()
mutex_lock(&rdtgroup_mutex) rmdir_all_sub()
mon_put_kn_priv()
/* Delete all mon_data structures */
rdtgroup_destroy_root()
kernfs_destroy_root()
rdtgroup_default.kn = NULL
mutex_unlock(&rdtgroup_mutex)
/*
* rdtgroup_default.flags is empty so
* rdtgroup_kn_lock_live() returns
* &rdtgroup_default
*/
md = of->kn->priv;
/* md points to freed mon_data */
Set RDT_DELETED for the default group unconditionally since the flag does
not lead to the freeing of this statically allocated group.
Do not allow a new resctrl mount if there are any waiters on default group
of previous mount. A new mount will re-initialize the default group that
would appear to waiters from previous mount as though the default group is
accessible causing them to access the mon_data structures from the previous
mount that have been removed.
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
- 0.2% 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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). 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