In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
usb: atm: cxacru: properly kill rcv_urb on error in cxacru_cm()
If cxacru_cm() encounters an error while submitting or waiting for snd_urb,
it aborts and returns the error without killing the already submitted
rcv_urb. This leaves the rcv_urb active.
When this happens during initialization (e.g., in cxacru_atm_start()), the
driver may ignore the error and proceed to call cxacru_poll_status(), which
invokes cxacru_cm() again. Attempting to submit the still-active rcv_urb
triggers a warning in usb_submit_urb():
cxacru 1-1:1.0: send of cm 0x84 failed (-104)
ATM dev 0: cxacru_atm_start: CHIP_ADSL_LINE_START returned -104
------------[ cut here ]------------
URB ffff88812658d200 submitted while active
WARNING: drivers/usb/core/urb.c:379 at usb_submit_urb+0x79/0x18b0
drivers/usb/core/urb.c:379
...
Call Trace:
cxacru_cm+0x21a/0xf10 drivers/usb/atm/cxacru.c:631
cxacru_cm_get_array drivers/usb/atm/cxacru.c:722 [inline]
cxacru_poll_status+0x178/0x1110 drivers/usb/atm/cxacru.c:828
cxacru_atm_start+0x185/0x360 drivers/usb/atm/cxacru.c:814
usbatm_atm_init+0x144/0x3a0 drivers/usb/atm/usbatm.c:927
usbatm_usb_probe+0x15cb/0x1db0 drivers/usb/atm/usbatm.c:1178
cxacru_usb_probe+0x17f/0x220 drivers/usb/atm/cxacru.c:1370
...
To fix this, ensure that rcv_urb is properly killed if cxacru_cm() aborts
early. We can safely call usb_kill_urb() on rcv_urb in the error path, as
it is safe to call even if the URB is not active (e.g., if it failed to
submit in the first place, or if it already completed).
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA 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 BOD 26-04 block below.
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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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