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
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 6.7 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:
io_uring/cmd: don't leave list poison in ->hash_node
io_uring_cmd_del_cancelable() uses hlist_del() to take a command off
->cancelable_uring_cmd, which leaves LIST_POISON1/2 behind in
->hash_node. Requests are recycled through the request cache without
being reinitialised, and not every user of ->hash_node sets it up before
it is used:
If a vectored futex wait is woken while futex_wait_multiple_setup() is
still queueing the futexes, io_futexv_wait() doesn't add the request to
->futex_list, and leaves the completion to the task_work queued by the
wake up. io_futexv_complete() ends in __io_futex_complete(), whose
hlist_del_init() is fine for a request that is unhashed, which is how all
other users of the node leave it. If the request was a cancelable
uring_cmd in its previous life, e.g. a ublk FETCH_REQ, it writes through
LIST_POISON2:
Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
KASAN: maybe wild-memory-access in range [0xdead000000000120-...]
RIP: 0010:io_futexv_complete+0x219/0x420
Call Trace:
tctx_task_work_run+0x804/0x950
tctx_task_work+0x71/0xa0
task_work_run+0x118/0x200
Leave the node unhashed.
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 2026-11-03). 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
- 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.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 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.
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