In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mei: vsc: Fix fortify-panic caused by invalid counted_by() use
gcc 15 honors the __counted_by(len) attribute on vsc_tp_packet.buf[]
and the vsc-tp.c code is using this in a wrong way. len does not contain
the available size in the buffer, it contains the actual packet length
*without* the crc. So as soon as vsc_tp_xfer() tries to add the crc to
buf[] the fortify-panic handler gets triggered:
[ 80.842193] memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 4 byte write of buffer size 0
[ 80.842243] WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 272 at lib/string_helpers.c:1032 __fortify_report+0x45/0x50
...
[ 80.843175] __fortify_panic+0x9/0xb
[ 80.843186] vsc_tp_xfer.cold+0x67/0x67 [mei_vsc_hw]
[ 80.843210] ? seqcount_lockdep_reader_access.constprop.0+0x82/0x90
[ 80.843229] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x7c/0x110
[ 80.843250] mei_vsc_hw_start+0x98/0x120 [mei_vsc]
[ 80.843270] mei_reset+0x11d/0x420 [mei]
The easiest fix would be to just drop the counted-by but with the exception
of the ack buffer in vsc_tp_xfer_helper() which only contains enough room
for the packet-header, all other uses of vsc_tp_packet always use a buffer
of VSC_TP_MAX_XFER_SIZE bytes for the packet.
Instead of just dropping the counted-by, split the vsc_tp_packet struct
definition into a header and a full-packet definition and use a fixed
size buf[] in the packet definition, this way fortify-source buffer
overrun checking still works when enabled.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-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 2026-10-25). 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