In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ALSA: emu10k1: Fix out of bounds access in snd_emu10k1_pcm_channel_alloc()
The voice allocator sometimes begins allocating from near the end of the
array and then wraps around, however snd_emu10k1_pcm_channel_alloc()
accesses the newly allocated voices as if it never wrapped around.
This results in out of bounds access if the first voice has a high enough
index so that first_voice + requested_voice_count > NUM_G (64).
The more voices are requested, the more likely it is for this to occur.
This was initially discovered using PipeWire, however it can be reproduced
by calling aplay multiple times with 16 channels:
aplay -r 48000 -D plughw:CARD=Live,DEV=3 -c 16 /dev/zero
UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in sound/pci/emu10k1/emupcm.c:127:40
index 65 is out of range for type 'snd_emu10k1_voice [64]'
CPU: 1 PID: 31977 Comm: aplay Tainted: G W IOE 6.0.0-rc2-emu10k1+ #7
Hardware name: ASUSTEK COMPUTER INC P5W DH Deluxe/P5W DH Deluxe, BIOS 3002 07/22/2010
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x49/0x63
dump_stack+0x10/0x16
ubsan_epilogue+0x9/0x3f
__ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds.cold+0x44/0x49
snd_emu10k1_playback_hw_params+0x3bc/0x420 [snd_emu10k1]
snd_pcm_hw_params+0x29f/0x600 [snd_pcm]
snd_pcm_common_ioctl+0x188/0x1410 [snd_pcm]
? exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x35/0x170
? do_syscall_64+0x69/0x90
? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x26/0x50
? do_syscall_64+0x69/0x90
? exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x35/0x170
snd_pcm_ioctl+0x27/0x40 [snd_pcm]
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x95/0xd0
do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90
? do_syscall_64+0x69/0x90
? do_syscall_64+0x69/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
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
- 0.2% 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