CVE-2026-99218

HIGHPre-NVD 7.07.0
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 7.0 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-11-02. The CNA's CVSS baseline 7.0; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: the CNA's CVSS, EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory
Trending — 5 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-115260 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-2cpv-4f6v-pr9h (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.0EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationNo fix is confirmed yet: check the vendor's advisory for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.1%CVSS: 7.0Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

The CVE record's CNA (kernel.org) lists Linux versions before 2.6.27 and 7.4-rc1 and later as unaffected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.

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

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads

coredump_finish() releases the parked threads by clearing ->task in their core_thread entry and calling wake_up_process() on each of them. It does that without holding a reference on the task and without being inside rcu.

But calling wake_up_process(task) without rcu here isn't safe. A parked thread doesn't need that wakeup to leave. A spurious wakeup or a preemption after the store is enough for the task to go away.

So if the coredump client is preempted between the store and wake_up_process() the thread can exit and be freed in the meantime and try_to_wake_up() takes pi_lock in freed memory.

Hold rcu across the loop.

CVSS v3
7.0
EG Score
7.0HIGHhigh confidence
EG Risk
32
EG Risk 32/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity70% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.0 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.1% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Check the vendor's advisory for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.
EPSS PROB
0.1%
EPSS %ILE
1st
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.0 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 2026-11-03). 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.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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).

No fix is confirmed yet. Check the vendor's advisory for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.

The score's inputs: 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

November 2, 2026

Last Modified

November 3, 2026

Advisory Details (6)

Auto-updated Nov 2, 2026
No fix on record yet.
Web page

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fd0fbe84312fda2fc187428c92c50b7d03a9d24c
Web page

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b0eca0edddf4c1dbaf6d1f6a8636b4235f5bc573
Web page

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a0f09ff4c6b93312e565cfe75d76c3a551a3ec4c
Web page

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/71146c437bae59e5280f657965dc6d006ee3989b
Web page

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/16e94ed90b1b02398e044d41fd1db34828daa08e
Web page

coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0fce73efee40c65ce26641c5d93942462f9e8307

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-99218(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 7× 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. 2026-11-03 19:22 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-11-03 19:22 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-2cpv-4f6v-pr9h · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.0
  3. 2026-11-03 16:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  4. 2026-11-02 17:03 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-115260 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  5. 2026-11-02 16:29 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-11-02 16:17 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 7.0 HIGH
  7. 2026-11-02 16:12 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-99218?
CVE-2026-99218 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 2, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: coredump: hold RCU while releasing parked threads coredump_finish() releases the parked threads by clearing ->task in their core_thread entry and calling wake_up_process() on each of them. It does that without holding a reference…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-99218 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-99218 was published on November 2, 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 November 3, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-99218 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-99218 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (1st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-99218?
CVE-2026-99218 has a CVSS base score of 7.0 (the CNA's own assessment, by linux; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-99218?
No fix for CVE-2026-99218 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The CVE record's CNA (kernel.org) lists Linux versions before 2.6.27 and 7.4-rc1 and later as unaffected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-99218 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-99218

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-99218?

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