In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: fix UAF by restoring RCU-delayed inode freeing in bpffs
commit 4f375ade6aa9 ("bpf: Avoid RCU context warning when unpinning
htab with internal structs") moved inode cleanup from ->free_inode()
into ->destroy_inode() to avoid sleeping in RCU context when calling
bpf_any_put(). However this removed the RCU delay on freeing the
inode itself and the cached symlink body (i_link), both of which
can be accessed by RCU pathwalk (pick_link, may_lookup etc.).
This causes a use-after-free when a concurrent unlinkat() drops the
last inode reference and destroy_inode() frees the inode immediately,
while another task is still walking the path in RCU mode and reads
inode->i_opflags (offset +2) inside current_time() -> is_mgtime().
KASAN reports:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in is_mgtime include/linux/fs.h:2313
Read of size 2 at addr ffff8880407e4282 (offset +2 = i_opflags)
The rules (per Al Viro):
->destroy_inode() called immediately, can sleep, use for blocking
cleanup e.g. bpf_any_put()
->free_inode() called after RCU grace period, use for freeing
inode and anything RCU-accessible e.g. i_link
Fix: split the two concerns properly:
- keep bpf_any_put() in bpf_destroy_inode() since it is blocking
and needs to run promptly
- introduce bpf_free_inode() to handle kfree(i_link) and
free_inode_nonrcu() with proper RCU delay, preventing the UAF
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
- 0.1% 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