EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
- •High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 8.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed
A fix is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but no release containing it is confirmed — find the release that contains it; until it is applied, mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation).
The Zephyr virtio driver does not validate the descriptor-chain head id that the virtio device writes into the used ring. In virtio_isr() (drivers/virtio/virtio_common.c), the device-written vq->used->ring[idx].id is used directly as an index into vq->recv_cbs[] and vq->desc[], which are both allocated with exactly vq->num entries. recv_cbs[] holds {cb, opaque} callback entries, and the indexed callback pointer is then invoked as cbe.cb(cbe.opaque, used_len).
Because the id is consumed as a 16-bit value with no bound check, a malicious or compromised virtio backend (an untrusted hypervisor, or an untrusted hardware/peer-processor virtio device on a PCI or MMIO transport) can supply an id far beyond vq->num. This causes an out-of-bounds read of a {function pointer, argument} pair from heap memory beyond recv_cbs[], after which the driver calls that attacker-shaped pointer in the guest's interrupt context. No guest privileges or user interaction are required; the backend triggers it by writing the shared used ring and raising the queue interrupt.
The result is an arbitrary / attacker-influenced function-pointer call in the Zephyr guest, i.e. a control-flow-hijack primitive that can lead to code execution or, at minimum, a reliable crash. The fix rejects any used-ring id >= vq->num before indexing recv_cbs[]/desc[] or invoking the callback. This affects builds using CONFIG_VIRTIO with the PCI or MMIO transport.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it and apply that within your standard update timelines; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (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)14 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 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