In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
io_uring/net: fix slab-out-of-bounds read in io_bundle_nbufs()
sqe->len is __u32 but gets stored into sr->len which is int. When
userspace passes sqe->len values exceeding INT_MAX (e.g. 0xFFFFFFFF),
sr->len overflows to a negative value. This negative value propagates
through the bundle recv/send path:
- io_recv(): sel.val = sr->len (ssize_t gets -1)
- io_recv_buf_select(): arg.max_len = sel->val (size_t gets
0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF)
- io_ring_buffers_peek(): buf->len is not clamped because max_len
is astronomically large
- iov[].iov_len = 0xFFFFFFFF flows into io_bundle_nbufs()
- io_bundle_nbufs(): min_t(int, 0xFFFFFFFF, ret) yields -1,
causing ret to increase instead of decrease, creating an
infinite loop that reads past the allocated iov[] array
This results in a slab-out-of-bounds read in io_bundle_nbufs() from
the kmalloc-64 slab, as nbufs increments past the allocated iovec
entries.
BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in io_bundle_nbufs+0x128/0x160
Read of size 8 at addr ffff888100ae05c8 by task exp/145
Call Trace:
io_bundle_nbufs+0x128/0x160
io_recv_finish+0x117/0xe20
io_recv+0x2db/0x1160
Fix this by rejecting negative sr->len values early in both
io_sendmsg_prep() and io_recvmsg_prep(). Since sqe->len is __u32,
any value > INT_MAX indicates overflow and is not a valid length.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-27). 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