In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/i915: Fix potential overflow of shmem scatterlist length
When a scatterlists table of a GEM shmem object of size 4 GB or more is
populated with pages allocated from a folio, unsigned int .length
attribute of a scatterlist may get overflowed if total byte length of
pages allocated to that single scatterlist happens to reach or cross the
4GB limit. As a consequence, users of the object may suffer from hitting
unexpected, premature end of the object's backing pages.
[278.780187] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[278.780377] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 2326 at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_mm.c:55 remap_sg+0x199/0x1d0 [i915]
...
[278.780654] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 2326 Comm: gem_mmap_offset Tainted: G S U 6.17.0-rc1-CI_DRM_16981-ged823aaa0607+ #1 PREEMPT(voluntary)
[278.780656] Tainted: [S]=CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, [U]=USER
[278.780658] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Meteor Lake Client Platform/MTL-P LP5x T3 RVP, BIOS MTLPFWI1.R00.3471.D91.2401310918 01/31/2024
[278.780659] RIP: 0010:remap_sg+0x199/0x1d0 [i915]
...
[278.780786] Call Trace:
[278.780787]
[278.780788] ? __apply_to_page_range+0x3e6/0x910
[278.780795] ? __pfx_remap_sg+0x10/0x10 [i915]
[278.780906] apply_to_page_range+0x14/0x30
[278.780908] remap_io_sg+0x14d/0x260 [i915]
[278.781013] vm_fault_cpu+0xd2/0x330 [i915]
[278.781137] __do_fault+0x3a/0x1b0
[278.781140] do_fault+0x322/0x640
[278.781143] __handle_mm_fault+0x938/0xfd0
[278.781150] handle_mm_fault+0x12c/0x300
[278.781152] ? lock_mm_and_find_vma+0x4b/0x760
[278.781155] do_user_addr_fault+0x2d6/0x8e0
[278.781160] exc_page_fault+0x96/0x2c0
[278.781165] asm_exc_page_fault+0x27/0x30
...
That issue was apprehended by the author of a change that introduced it,
and potential risk even annotated with a comment, but then never addressed.
When adding folio pages to a scatterlist table, take care of byte length
of any single scatterlist not exceeding max_segment.
(cherry picked from commit 06249b4e691a75694c014a61708c007fb5755f60)
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 2026-10-27). 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 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: 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 (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