CVE-2026-72251

CRITICALPre-NVD 9.89.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 9.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2026-08-15. A secondary CVSS source baseline 9.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
9.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.7%CVSS: 9.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer

quoting sashiko: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [..] noticed a potential memory bug and header corruption involving the SIP NAT helper.

In net/netfilter/nf_nat_sip.c:nf_nat_sip(): if (skb_ensure_writable(skb, skb->len)) { nf_ct_helper_log(skb, ct, "cannot mangle packet"); return NF_DROP; } uh = (void *)skb->data + protoff; uh->dest = ct_sip_info->forced_dport; if (!nf_nat_mangle_udp_packet(skb, ct, ctinfo, protoff, 0, 0, NULL, 0)) {

If a cloned or fragmented SKB is reallocated by skb_ensure_writable(), the old data buffer is freed. However, nf_nat_sip() fails to update *dptr to point to the new buffer.

It also appears to use nf_nat_mangle_udp_packet() on what could be a TCP packet, which would overwrite the sequence number with a checksum update. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

nf_conntrack_sip linerizes skbs, hence no fragmented skb can be seen. But clones are possible, so rebuild dptr.

Disable nf_nat_mangle_udp_packet() branch for TCP streams. It doesn't look like this can ever happen, else we should have received bug reports about this, so just check the conntrack is UDP and drop otherwise.

The calling conntrack_sip set ->forced_dport for SIP_HDR_VIA_UDP messages, so I don't think this is ever expected to be true for a TCP stream.

CVSS v3
9.8
EG Score
9.8CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
59
EG Risk 59/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity98% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.7% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.7%
EPSS %ILE
52nd
KEV
Not listed

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
0.7% 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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

Published

August 15, 2026

Last Modified

October 16, 2026

Advisory Details (8)

Auto-updated Oct 16, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/eae9c6ccb5af69c713a65f8ae219f5c1aa32cd17
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e38143c9b477f2968024c47c647dd4456a40aff1
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dc11f26685aa850f237226f0f463647aea58ab7c
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/bded21a4bf9bf86a79148be735723a97ca9a7532
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/77e43bcb7ec177e293a5c3f1b91a2c5aebfb6c68
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/57e4e29644ec054d7021d296407e7ddd844afea2
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2bcf2c5052fb5e73e255140ab43f056aef409c27
Web page

netfilter: nf_nat_sip: reload possible stale data pointer - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0e76e3e886cc9ee027337d5ad39cb96f57b7bdc7

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-72251(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(15)

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 6.1.99-1 (55 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.180-1: fixed in 6.1.180-1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.38-1 ... 6.12.96-1 (31 versions)
  • every version up to 6.12.100-1: fixed in 6.12.100-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.1~rc7-1~exp1 (160 versions)
  • every version up to 7.1.5-1: fixed in 7.1.5-1
—

All Vendor Advisories

(15)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 25× in last 7d / 190× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 458 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 358 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-10-19 19:03 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-19 19:03 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  3. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  4. 2026-10-18 19:10 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-18 19:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  6. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  7. 2026-10-18 03:16 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-17 19:18 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-17 19:18 UTCVendor advisory
  10. 2026-10-17 19:18 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  11. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  12. 2026-10-16 19:26 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-16 19:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  14. 2026-10-16 18:59 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-16 18:58 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  16. 2026-10-16 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  17. 2026-10-16 14:17 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-16 14:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  19. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  20. 2026-10-15 14:18 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-15 14:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  22. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  23. 2026-10-14 09:01 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-10-14 09:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  25. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-13 05:43 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-13 05:42 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  3. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  4. 2026-10-12 15:42 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-12 05:50 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  6. 2026-10-11 19:27 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 16:43 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 14:03 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  10. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  11. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  12. 2026-10-08 17:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  13. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  14. 2026-10-07 06:52 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-10-07 06:51 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  16. 2026-10-07 02:46 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-10-07 02:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  18. 2026-10-06 22:43 UTCVendor advisory
  19. 2026-10-06 22:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  20. 2026-10-06 17:17 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-06 17:17 UTCVendor advisory
  22. 2026-10-06 17:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  23. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  24. 2026-10-06 13:17 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-10-06 13:16 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  26. 2026-10-06 09:16 UTCEG score recompute
  27. 2026-10-06 09:16 UTCVendor advisory
  28. 2026-10-06 09:16 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  29. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  30. 2026-10-05 17:38 UTCVendor advisory
  31. 2026-10-05 17:38 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  32. 2026-10-05 12:37 UTCVendor advisory
  33. 2026-10-05 12:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  34. 2026-10-05 06:50 UTCVendor advisory
  35. 2026-10-05 06:50 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  36. 2026-10-05 02:27 UTCEG score recompute
  37. 2026-10-05 02:27 UTCVendor advisory
  38. 2026-10-05 02:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  39. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  40. 2026-10-04 22:04 UTCVendor advisory
  41. 2026-10-04 22:04 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  42. 2026-10-04 16:30 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-10-04 16:30 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  44. 2026-10-04 12:11 UTCVendor advisory
  45. 2026-10-04 12:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  46. 2026-10-04 07:41 UTCVendor advisory
  47. 2026-10-04 07:41 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  48. 2026-10-04 03:40 UTCVendor advisory
  49. 2026-10-04 03:39 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  50. 2026-10-03 19:36 UTCEG score recompute
  51. 2026-10-03 19:36 UTCVendor advisory
  52. 2026-10-03 19:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  53. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 52nd percentile
  54. 2026-10-03 01:48 UTCVendor advisory
  55. 2026-10-03 01:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  56. 2026-10-02 21:47 UTCEG score recompute
  57. 2026-10-02 21:47 UTCVendor advisory
  58. 2026-10-02 21:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  59. 2026-10-02 15:54 UTCVendor advisory
  60. 2026-10-02 15:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  61. 2026-10-02 07:13 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-10-02 07:13 UTCVendor advisory
  63. 2026-10-02 07:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  64. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 51st percentile
  65. 2026-10-01 13:55 UTCVendor advisory
  66. 2026-10-01 13:55 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  67. 2026-10-01 09:53 UTCVendor advisory
  68. 2026-10-01 09:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  69. 2026-10-01 05:53 UTCVendor advisory
  70. 2026-10-01 05:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  71. 2026-10-01 01:38 UTCVendor advisory
  72. 2026-10-01 01:38 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  73. 2026-09-30 21:11 UTCEG score recompute
  74. 2026-09-30 21:11 UTCVendor advisory
  75. 2026-09-30 21:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-56q2-hf63-wxmq · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-72251?
CVE-2026-72251 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on August 15, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nfnatsip: reload possible stale data pointer quoting sashiko: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [..] noticed a potential memory bug and header corruption involving the SIP NAT…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-72251 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-72251 was published on August 15, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 16, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-72251 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-72251 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.7% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (52nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-72251?
CVE-2026-72251 has a CVSS base score of 9.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-72251?
A fix for CVE-2026-72251 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-72251 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-72251

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-72251?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.