In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
x86/vmware: Fix hypercall clobbers
Fedora QA reported the following panic:
BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 0000000040003e54
#PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode
#PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS edk2-20251119-3.fc43 11/19/2025
RIP: 0010:vmware_hypercall4.constprop.0+0x52/0x90
..
Call Trace:
vmmouse_report_events+0x13e/0x1b0
psmouse_handle_byte+0x15/0x60
ps2_interrupt+0x8a/0xd0
...
because the QEMU VMware mouse emulation is buggy, and clears the top 32
bits of %rdi that the kernel kept a pointer in.
The QEMU vmmouse driver saves and restores the register state in a
"uint32_t data[6];" and as a result restores the state with the high
bits all cleared.
RDI originally contained the value of a valid kernel stack address
(0xff5eeb3240003e54). After the vmware hypercall it now contains
0x40003e54, and we get a page fault as a result when it is dereferenced.
The proper fix would be in QEMU, but this works around the issue in the
kernel to keep old setups working, when old kernels had not happened to
keep any state in %rdi over the hypercall.
In theory this same issue exists for all the hypercalls in the vmmouse
driver; in practice it has only been seen with vmware_hypercall3() and
vmware_hypercall4(). For now, just mark RDI/RSI as clobbered for those
two calls. This should have a minimal effect on code generation overall
as it should be rare for the compiler to want to make RDI/RSI live
across hypercalls.
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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