In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ALSA: seq: midi: Serialize output teardown with event_input
event_process_midi() borrows msynth->output_rfile.output and then
passes the substream to dump_midi() and snd_rawmidi_kernel_write()
without synchronizing with the output open/close transition.
midisynth_use() also publishes output_rfile before
snd_rawmidi_output_params() has finished.
The last midisynth_unuse() can therefore release the same rawmidi file
and free substream->runtime before snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1() takes
its runtime buffer reference. That leaves the event_input path using a
stale substream or runtime and can end in a NULL-deref or use-after-free.
Fix this with two pieces of synchronization. Keep a short IRQ-safe
spinlock only for publishing or clearing output_rfile and for pairing
the output snapshot with an snd_use_lock_t reference. Once
event_process_midi() has taken that in-flight reference, it drops the
spinlock before calling snd_seq_dump_var_event(), dump_midi(), or
snd_rawmidi_kernel_write(). midisynth_unuse() now detaches the visible
rawmidi file under the same spinlock, waits for the in-flight writers
to drain, and only then drains and releases the saved file.
midisynth_use() likewise opens into a local snd_rawmidi_file and
publishes it only after snd_rawmidi_output_params() succeeds.
The buggy scenario involves two paths, with each column showing the
order within that path:
event_input path: last unuse path:
- event_process_midi() snapshots 1. midisynth_unuse() starts
output_rfile.output. tearing down output_rfile.
- dump_midi() reaches 2. snd_rawmidi_kernel_release()
snd_rawmidi_kernel_write() closes the output file.
before runtime is pinned. 3. close_substream() frees
- The callback keeps using substream->runtime.
the borrowed substream.
Validation reproduced this kernel report:
KASAN null-ptr-deref in snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1+0x56/0x360
RIP: 0033:0x7fde7dd0837f
RIP: 0010:snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1+0x56/0x360
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