In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
vhost/net: complete zerocopy ubufs only once
vhost-net initializes one ubuf_info per outstanding zerocopy TX
descriptor and hands it to the backend socket. The networking stack may
then clone a zerocopy skb before all skb references are released. For
example, batman-adv fragmentation reaches skb_split(), which calls
skb_zerocopy_clone() and increments the same ubuf_info refcount.
vhost_zerocopy_complete() currently treats every ubuf callback as a
completed vhost descriptor. It dereferences ubuf->ctx, writes the
descriptor completion state, and drops the vhost_net_ubuf_ref even when
the callback only releases a cloned skb reference. A backend reset can
therefore wait for and free the vhost_net_ubuf_ref while another cloned
skb still carries the same ubuf_info. A later completion then
dereferences the freed ubufs pointer.
KASAN reports the stale completion as:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in vhost_zerocopy_complete+0x1d7/0x1f0
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in vhost_zerocopy_complete+0x101/0x1f0
vhost_zerocopy_complete
skb_copy_ubufs
__dev_forward_skb2
veth_xmit
The freed object was allocated from vhost_net_ioctl() while setting the
backend and freed through kfree_rcu()/kvfree_rcu_bulk after backend
removal, while delayed skb completion still reached
vhost_zerocopy_complete().
Honor the generic ubuf_info refcount before touching vhost state, and run
the vhost descriptor completion only for the final ubuf reference. This
matches the msg_zerocopy_complete() ownership rule for cloned zerocopy
skbs.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.3 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% 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