In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ipvs: reset full ip_vs_seq structs in ip_vs_conn_new
Commit 9a05475cebdd ("ipvs: avoid kmem_cache_zalloc in
ip_vs_conn_new") changed ip_vs_conn_new() to allocate an ip_vs_conn
object with kmem_cache_alloc(). The function then initializes many
fields explicitly, but only resets in_seq.delta and out_seq.delta in the
two struct ip_vs_seq members.
That leaves init_seq and previous_delta uninitialized. This is normally
harmless while the corresponding IP_VS_CONN_F_IN_SEQ or
IP_VS_CONN_F_OUT_SEQ flag is clear. For connections learned from a sync
message, however, ip_vs_proc_conn() preserves those flags from
IP_VS_CONN_F_BACKUP_MASK and passes opt=NULL when the message omits
IPVS_OPT_SEQ_DATA. In that case the new connection can be hashed with
SEQ flags set but with the rest of in_seq/out_seq still containing stale
slab data.
When a packet for such a connection is later handled by an IPVS
application helper, vs_fix_seq() and vs_fix_ack_seq() use
previous_delta and init_seq to rewrite TCP sequence numbers. A malformed
sync message can therefore make forwarded packets carry stale slab bytes
in their TCP seq/ack numbers, and can also corrupt the forwarded TCP
flow.
Reset both struct ip_vs_seq members completely before publishing the
connection. This matches the existing "reset struct ip_vs_seq" comment
and keeps the sequence-adjustment gates inactive unless valid sequence
data is installed later.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.7% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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