In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
iommu/vt-d: Clear Present bit before tearing down context entry
When tearing down a context entry, the current implementation zeros the
entire 128-bit entry using multiple 64-bit writes. This creates a window
where the hardware can fetch a "torn" entry — where some fields are
already zeroed while the 'Present' bit is still set — leading to
unpredictable behavior or spurious faults.
While x86 provides strong write ordering, the compiler may reorder writes
to the two 64-bit halves of the context entry. Even without compiler
reordering, the hardware fetch is not guaranteed to be atomic with
respect to multiple CPU writes.
Align with the "Guidance to Software for Invalidations" in the VT-d spec
(Section 6.5.3.3) by implementing the recommended ownership handshake:
- Clear only the 'Present' (P) bit of the context entry first to
signal the transition of ownership from hardware to software.
- Use dma_wmb() to ensure the cleared bit is visible to the IOMMU.
- Perform the required cache and context-cache invalidation to ensure
hardware no longer has cached references to the entry.
- Fully zero out the entry only after the invalidation is complete.
Also, add a dma_wmb() to context_set_present() to ensure the entry
is fully initialized before the 'Present' bit becomes visible.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.5 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 2026-10-19). 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