In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
xprtrdma: Fix ep kref imbalance on ADDR_CHANGE
rpcrdma_cm_event_handler() falls through to the disconnected: label
on RDMA_CM_EVENT_ADDR_CHANGE and calls rpcrdma_ep_put() with no
matching get when the event arrives before RDMA_CM_EVENT_ESTABLISHED.
The kref then underflows during connect teardown and
rpcrdma_xprt_disconnect() operates on a freed ep.
Reference counts across a normal connection lifecycle:
rpcrdma_ep_create() kref_init ->1
rpcrdma_xprt_connect() ep_get ->2 (before post_recvs)
RDMA_CM_EVENT_ESTABLISHED ep_get ->3
RDMA_CM_EVENT_DISCONNECTED ep_put ->2
rpcrdma_xprt_drain() ep_put ->1
rpcrdma_xprt_disconnect() tail ep_put ->0 (ep_destroy)
The connect-time get in rpcrdma_xprt_connect(), taken just before
rpcrdma_post_recvs() "while there are outstanding Receives," is
balanced by rpcrdma_xprt_drain. ADDR_CHANGE before ESTABLISHED has
no get to consume, so its put drops the count to 1 and the drain
put then frees the ep while rpcrdma_xprt_disconnect() still holds a
pointer to it.
Fix by dispatching on the prior re_connect_status via xchg(): for
prev == 0 (pre-ESTABLISHED) wake the connect waiter and return with
no put; for prev == 1 call rpcrdma_force_disconnect() and return.
The case-1 arm relies on the subsequent RDMA_CM_EVENT_DISCONNECTED
event -- reliably delivered when rdma_disconnect() is called on a
still-connected cm_id -- to balance the ESTABLISHED get;
rpcrdma_xprt_drain() continues to balance only that connect-time
get. Any other prior value means teardown is already in flight.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.4% 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