In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net/sched: cls_route: fix fastmap use-after-free on filter
The route4 classifier maintains a 16-slot fastmap cache that stores raw
struct route4_filter pointers indexed by (id, iif). The reader
(route4_classify) populates this cache via route4_set_fastmap() for every
classified packet that hits a filter. The writer (route4_delete,
route4_change) clears the cache via route4_reset_fastmap() before
RCU-deferred kfree of the filter.
This creates a UAF race:
- Reader walks the RCU-protected bucket chain, finds filter f
- Writer unlinks f, calls route4_reset_fastmap(), then tcf_queue_work()
- Reader calls route4_set_fastmap() and writes f into the cache
*after* the writer's reset, caching a pointer about to be freed
- After the RCU grace period, kfree(f) executes
- Next classified packet on the same (id, iif) tuple hits the stale
fastmap entry and reads f->res from freed memory
Reproduced with an mdelay(100) accelerator in route4_set_fastmap() and a
concurrent add/delete stress test (provided by both zdi and Santosh).
Both triggered KASAN slab-use-after-free reports in the route4 fastmap
paths.
Fix:
Introduce a per-filter boolean dying flag to suppress stale fastmap
republishing by in-flight readers.
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