CVE-2026-98371

UNRATEDCVSS · not yet scoredTrending — 3 sources updated this week
—
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • No CVSS published and no exploitation signals yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS v2: —Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

xfrm: iptfs: fix runt reassembly panic from short inner tot_len

When the start of an inner packet is split across two outer packets such that fewer than 4 bytes land at the end of the first one, __input_process_payload() saves those bytes as a runt and skips the iplen/iphlen validation performed for in-place packets. When the continuation packet arrives, iptfs_reassem_cont() only requires the declared inner length to be >= sizeof(ra_runt) (6) before allocating the reassembly skb with that attacker-controlled length.

However, __iptfs_iphlen() always returns the fixed minimum IP header size (20 for IPv4, 40 for IPv6), so for an inner IPv4 tot_len in [6, 19] the header-completion copy writes past the declared packet length, and the subsequent "ipremain -= copylen" underflows to ~4GB, leaving the payload copy length bounded only by blkoff (up to 64KB). At runtime the skb_put() tailroom check turns this into skb_over_panic(), i.e. an unprivileged kernel panic (DoS), reachable locally via userns+netns IPTFS SAs and remotely against IPTFS VPN gateways when the decrypted outer skb is linear (e.g. AF_PACKET taps, tun/tap delivery).

Align the runt path with the normal path by requiring the declared inner length to cover at least the IP header size. This also subsumes the previous >= sizeof(ra_runt) check, since the minimum IP header is always larger than the runt buffer.

This issue was found by the autokbug dynamic kernel fuzzer at Tencent Yunding Lab.

CVSS v3
—
EchelonGraph score
Not yet assessedNo source has published severity data for this CVE yet — no CVSS score from NVD or a CNA, no GitHub advisory, and it is not in CISA KEV. This is not a rating of zero; we cannot assess it yet.
EG Score
—
EG Risk
—
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
4th
KEV
Not listed

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

Published

October 6, 2026

Last Modified

October 6, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-98371(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (181 versions)
  • every version up to 7.2.8-1: fixed in 7.2.8-1
—

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 13× in last 7d / 17× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  2. 2026-10-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  3. 2026-10-12 14:38 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-11 19:10 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-11 16:24 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  7. 2026-10-11 13:37 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  9. 2026-10-09 20:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  10. 2026-10-09 11:26 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-09 11:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jfv3-vhc3-4xwh
  12. 2026-10-08 17:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  13. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  14. 2026-10-06 15:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  15. 2026-10-06 09:28 UTCNVD update
  16. 2026-10-06 08:53 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-06 08:52 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-98371?
CVE-2026-98371 is a vulnerability whose severity is not yet rated; its CVE record was published on October 6, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: iptfs: fix runt reassembly panic from short inner tot_len When the start of an inner packet is split across two outer packets such that fewer than 4 bytes land at the end of the first one, inputprocesspayload() saves those…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-98371 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-98371 was published on October 6, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 6, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-98371 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-98371 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (4th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-98371?
A fix for CVE-2026-98371 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-98371 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-98371

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-98371?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.