In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables
When huge_pmd_unshare() is called to unshare a PMD table, the
tlb_unshare_pmd_ptdesc() function sets tlb->unshared_tables=true
but the aarch64 tlb_flush() only checked tlb->freed_tables to
determine whether to use TLBF_NONE (vae1is, invalidates walk
cache) or TLBF_NOWALKCACHE (vale1is, leaf-only).
This caused the stale PMD page table entry to remain in the walk cache
after unshare, potentially leading to incorrect page table walks.
Fix by including unshared_tables in the check, so that when
unsharing tables, TLBF_NONE is used and the walk cache is properly
invalidated.
Here is the detailed distinction between vae1is and vale1is:
| Instruction Combination | Actual Invalidation Scope |
| ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------|
| VAE1IS + TTL=0 | All entries at all levels (full invalidation) |
| VAE1IS + TTL=2 (L2) | Non-leaf at Level 0/1 + leaf at Level 2 |
| VALE1IS + TTL=0 | Leaf entries at all levels (non-leaf not cleared) |
| VALE1IS + TTL=2 (L2) | Leaf entry at Level 2 only |
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 2026-10-19). 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