In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ibmveth: Disable GSO for packets with small MSS
Some physical adapters on Power systems do not support segmentation
offload when the MSS is less than 224 bytes. Attempting to send such
packets causes the adapter to freeze, stopping all traffic until
manually reset.
Implement ndo_features_check to disable GSO for packets with small MSS
values. The network stack will perform software segmentation instead.
The 224-byte minimum matches ibmvnic
commit ("ibmvnic: Enforce stronger sanity checks
on GSO packets")
which uses the same physical adapters in SEA configurations.
The issue occurs specifically when the hardware attempts to perform
segmentation (gso_segs > 1) with a small MSS. Single-segment GSO packets
(gso_segs == 1) do not trigger the problematic LSO code path and are
transmitted normally without segmentation.
Add an ndo_features_check callback to disable GSO when MSS < 224 bytes.
Also call vlan_features_check() to ensure proper handling of VLAN packets,
particularly QinQ (802.1ad) configurations where the hardware parser may
not support certain offload features.
Validated using iptables to force small MSS values. Without the fix,
the adapter freezes. With the fix, packets are segmented in software
and transmission succeeds. Comprehensive regression testing completedd
(MSS tests, performance, stability).
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.6): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.6 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.6 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-30). 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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