In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
kyber: fix out of bounds access when preempted
__blk_mq_sched_bio_merge() gets the ctx and hctx for the current CPU and
passes the hctx to ->bio_merge(). kyber_bio_merge() then gets the ctx
for the current CPU again and uses that to get the corresponding Kyber
context in the passed hctx. However, the thread may be preempted between
the two calls to blk_mq_get_ctx(), and the ctx returned the second time
may no longer correspond to the passed hctx. This "works" accidentally
most of the time, but it can cause us to read garbage if the second ctx
came from an hctx with more ctx's than the first one (i.e., if
ctx->index_hw[hctx->type] > hctx->nr_ctx).
This manifested as this UBSAN array index out of bounds error reported
by Jakub:
UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in ../kernel/locking/qspinlock.c:130:9
index 13106 is out of range for type 'long unsigned int [128]'
Call Trace:
dump_stack+0xa4/0xe5
ubsan_epilogue+0x5/0x40
__ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds.cold.13+0x2a/0x34
queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x476/0x480
do_raw_spin_lock+0x1c2/0x1d0
kyber_bio_merge+0x112/0x180
blk_mq_submit_bio+0x1f5/0x1100
submit_bio_noacct+0x7b0/0x870
submit_bio+0xc2/0x3a0
btrfs_map_bio+0x4f0/0x9d0
btrfs_submit_data_bio+0x24e/0x310
submit_one_bio+0x7f/0xb0
submit_extent_page+0xc4/0x440
__extent_writepage_io+0x2b8/0x5e0
__extent_writepage+0x28d/0x6e0
extent_write_cache_pages+0x4d7/0x7a0
extent_writepages+0xa2/0x110
do_writepages+0x8f/0x180
__writeback_single_inode+0x99/0x7f0
writeback_sb_inodes+0x34e/0x790
__writeback_inodes_wb+0x9e/0x120
wb_writeback+0x4d2/0x660
wb_workfn+0x64d/0xa10
process_one_work+0x53a/0xa80
worker_thread+0x69/0x5b0
kthread+0x20b/0x240
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
Only Kyber uses the hctx, so fix it by passing the request_queue to
->bio_merge() instead. BFQ and mq-deadline just use that, and Kyber can
map the queues itself to avoid the mismatch.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 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 2026-10-20). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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)60 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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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