In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
afs: Fix reinitialisation of the inode, in particular ->lock_work
It seems that initalising afs_vnode::lock_work a single time in the slab's
init function isn't sufficient for work_structs. This results in the
DEBUG_OBJECTS debugging stuff producing a warning occasionally when running
the generic/131 xfstest:
ODEBUG: activate not available (active state 0) object: 0000000016d8760f object type: work_struct hint: afs_lock_work+0x0/0x220
WARNING: lib/debugobjects.c:629 at debug_print_object+0x4b/0x90, CPU#3: locktest/7695
...
CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 7695 Comm: locktest Tainted: G S 7.1.0-build3+ #2771 PREEMPT
...
RIP: 0010:debug_print_object+0x65/0x90
...
Call Trace:
? __pfx_afs_lock_work+0x10/0x10
debug_object_activate+0x122/0x170
insert_work+0x25/0x60
__queue_work+0x2e0/0x340
queue_delayed_work_on+0x48/0x70
afs_fl_release_private+0x57/0x70
locks_release_private+0x5c/0xa0
locks_free_lock+0xe/0x20
posix_lock_inode+0x55f/0x5b0
locks_lock_inode_wait+0x81/0x140
? file_write_and_wait_range+0x50/0x70
afs_lock+0xcd/0x110
fcntl_setlk+0x10d/0x260
do_fcntl+0x24e/0x5b0
__do_sys_fcntl+0x6a/0x90
do_syscall_64+0x11e/0x310
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x71/0x79
Fix this by reinitialising ->lock_work after allocating an inode.
Also, flush ->lock_work when the inode is being evicted to make sure it's
not still running.
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 2026-10-17). 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 (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