In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net/iucv: filter frames in afiucv_hs_rcv() by ingress device
afiucv_hs_rcv() selects a socket from iucv_sk_list by matching four 8-byte
name fields in the transport header alone. No check is made against the
net_device the frame arrived on.
This can cause a frame arriving on any netdev to be delivered to an AF_IUCV
socket. Three problems follow.
First, a frame arriving over HiperSockets can be delivered to a socket
bound to the classic z/VM IUCV transport, which has iucv->hs_dev == NULL.
iucv_sock_bind() takes the classic path whenever the requested userid
matches iucv_userid, even on a guest that also has a HiperSockets device
carrying the same identifier. The child socket created by
afiucv_hs_callback_syn() for such a match inherits hs_dev = NULL and
transport = AF_IUCV_TRANS_HIPER, so the first send() on it returns -ENODEV.
The socket delivered to accept() is unusable.
Second, a frame arriving on one netdev can be delivered to a socket bound
to a different IQD device. Which can lead to
- Accept-queue exhaustion (DoS)
- Attacker-controlled peer identity in the child socket
- Data injection into existing sockets
- Fabric noise on the IQD fabric, where bogus replies are sent
- killing established connections
Third, all AF_IUCV sockets live in init_net, as iucv_sock_alloc() calls
sk_alloc(&init_net, ...). But even frames arriving on netdev devices in a
namespace can be delivered to an IUCV socket. So a process in an
unprivileged user and network namespace holding only the CAP_NET_RAW
capability valid within that namespace can send a raw ETH_P_AF_IUCV frame
on its own lo device and have it matched against init_net sockets.
Fix all three by skipping any socket whose hs_dev does not match the
ingress device. A classic z/VM IUCV socket has hs_dev == NULL; the ingress
dev is never NULL, so classic sockets are skipped automatically. An unbound
HIPER socket also has hs_dev == NULL and is skipped. A bound HIPER socket
is only reachable from the exact IQD device it was bound to. Because hs_dev
is always a device in init_net (iucv_sock_bind() scans
for_each_netdev_rcu(&init_net, ...) exclusively), a frame whose ingress
device belongs to another namespace never matches any socket.
Note that AF_IUCV over HiperSockets provides no per-connection
authentication: no sequence numbers, no TLS, no nonce. The four name fields
identifying a connection are exchanged in plaintext on the shared
HiperSockets segment (VCHID). Any host on the same HiperSockets segment
could spoof any frame type against an existing connection. That is a
protocol-level property unchanged by this patch. The fix reduces the attack
surface to peers present on the same HiperSockets segment.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.1 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-09). 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.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).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
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.
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