In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
KVM: x86: hyper-v: Bound the bank index when querying sparse banks
When checking if a VP ID is included in a sparse bank set, explicitly check
that the ID can actually be contained in a sparse bank (the TLFS allows for
a maximum of 64 banks of 64 vCPUs each). When handling a paravirtual TLB
flush for L2, the VP ID is copied verbatim from the enlightened VMCS,
without any bounds check, i.e. isn't guaranteed to be under the limit of
- Failure to check the bounds of the VP ID leads to an out-of-bounds read
when testing the sparse bank, and super strictly speaking could lead to KVM
performing an unnecessary TLB flush for an L2 vCPU.
==================================================================
BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in hv_is_vp_in_sparse_set+0x85/0x100 [kvm]
Read of size 8 at addr ffff88811ba5f598 by task hyperv_evmcs/2802
CPU: 12 UID: 1000 PID: 2802 Comm: hyperv_evmcs Not tainted 7.1.0-rc2 #7 PREEMPT
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x51/0x60
print_report+0xcb/0x5d0
kasan_report+0xb4/0xe0
kasan_check_range+0x35/0x1b0
hv_is_vp_in_sparse_set+0x85/0x100 [kvm]
kvm_hv_flush_tlb+0xe9e/0x16c0 [kvm]
kvm_hv_hypercall+0xe6b/0x1e60 [kvm]
vmx_handle_exit+0x485/0x1b60 [kvm_intel]
kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x22e3/0x5070 [kvm]
kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x5d0/0x10c0 [kvm]
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x129/0x1a0
do_syscall_64+0xb9/0xcf0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
RIP: 0033:0x7f0e62d1a9bf
The buggy address belongs to the physical page:
page: refcount:0 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0xffffffffffffffff pfn:0x11ba5f
flags: 0x4000000000000000(zone=1)
raw: 4000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
raw: ffffffffffffffff 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected
Memory state around the buggy address:
ffff88811ba5f480: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
ffff88811ba5f500: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
>ffff88811ba5f580: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
^
ffff88811ba5f600: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
ffff88811ba5f680: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
==================================================================
Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint
Opportunistically add a compile time assertion to ensure the maximum number
of sparse banks exactly matches the number of possible bits in the passed
in mask.
[sean: add KASAN splat, drop comment, add assert, massage changelog]
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.4): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.4 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.4 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 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