CVE-2026-64374

HIGHPre-NVD 7.57.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 7.5 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-07-25. A secondary CVSS source baseline 7.5; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
7.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 7.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT

RT migration is done aggressively. When a CPU schedules out a high priority RT task for a lower priority task, it will look to see if there's any RT tasks that are waiting to run on another CPU that is of higher priority than the task this CPU is about to run. If it finds one, it will pull that task over to the CPU and allow it to run there instead.

Normally, this pulling is done by looking at the RT overloaded mask (rto) which contains all the CPUs in the scheduler domain with RT tasks that are waiting to run due to a higher priority RT task currently running on their CPU. The CPU that is about to schedule a lower priority task will grab the rq lock of the overloaded CPU and move the RT task from that CPU's runqueue to the local one and schedule the higher priority RT task.

This caused issues when a lot of CPUs would schedule a lower priority task at the same time. They would all try to grab the same runqueue lock of the CPU with the overloaded RT tasks. Only the first CPU that got in will get that task. All the others would wait until they got the runqueue lock and see there's nothing to pull and do nothing. On systems with lots of CPUs, this caused a large latency (up to 500us) which is beyond what PREEMPT_RT is to allow.

The solution to that was to create an RT_PUSH_IPI logic. When any CPU wanted to pull a task, instead of grabbing the runqueue lock of the overloaded CPU, it would start by sending an IPI to the overloaded CPU, and that IPI handler would have the CPU with the waiting RT task do a push instead. Then that handler would send an IPI to the next CPU with overloaded RT tasks, and so on. Note, after the first CPU starts this process, if another CPU wanted to do a pull, it would see that the process has already begun and would only increment a counter to have the IPIs continue again.

The RT_PUSH_IPI solved the latency problem with PREEMPT_RT but could cause a new issue with non PREEMPT_RT. Namely, softirqs run in a threaded context on PREEMPT_RT but they can run in an interrupt context in non-RT.

If an IPI lands on a CPU that has just woken up multiple RT tasks and the current CPU is running a non RT or a low priority RT task, instead of doing a push, it would simply do a schedule on that CPU. But if a softirq was also executing on this CPU, the schedule would need to wait until the softirq finished. Until then, the CPU would still be considered overloaded as there are RT tasks still waiting to run on it.

A live lock occurred on a workload that was doing heavy networking traffic on a large machine where the softirqs would run 500us out of 750us. And it would also be waking up RT tasks, causing the RT pull logic to be constantly executed.

When a softirq triggered on a CPU with RT tasks queued but not running yet, and the other CPUs would see this CPU as being overloaded, they would send an IPI over to it. The CPU would notice that the waiting RT tasks are of higher priority than the currently running task and simply schedule that CPU instead. But because the softirq was executing, before it could schedule, it would receive another IPI to do the same. The amount of IPIs would slow down the currently running softirq so much that before it could return back to task context, it would execute another softirq never allowing the CPU to schedule. This live locked that CPU.

As RT_PUSH_IPI was created to help PREEMPT_RT, make it default off if PREEMPT_RT is not enabled.

CVSS v3
7.5
EG Score
7.5HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
49
EG Risk 49/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity75% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.5 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
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.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
31st
KEV
Not listed

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
0.4% 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; 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

Published

July 25, 2026

Last Modified

October 19, 2026

Advisory Details (8)

Auto-updated Jul 27, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dd29c017aed628076e915fe4cdfb5392fd4c5cab
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d8312a56d9a162e3ec76476aa487e7d20bc602e9
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b99f04ae3d200d2f8844aa29145bd18eccbeecde
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a18f80bf5359238c4f067d691b96af00286fdd89
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/89237c8fc15d8016a194076e648ccb57d75e65ae
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/860aaff72c8446fed5e576249e19952883a18885
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4bd0da48fbc1dbef6774175129107fbbdd353e26
Web page

sched/rt: Have RT_PUSH_IPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/44aae426dbfd51286f7eb601cfa14bc32164812a

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-64374(2)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(20)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntulinux-xilinx-zynqmp-tools-5.15.0-1080 (5.15.0-1080.84) @ jammy2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-6.8 (6.8.0-147.147) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-nvidia-hwe-24.04-edge (7.0.0-1018.18~24.04.1) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-gcp-edge (7.0.0-1011.11~24.04.1) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-nvidia-hwe-26.04 (7.0.0-2018.18) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-hwe-26.04-edge (7.0.0-31.31) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-nvidia-tegra-rt-6.8 (6.8.0-1036.39) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-nvidia-lowlatency-5.15 (5.15.0.1112.112) @ jammy2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-lts-24.04 (6.8.0-1071.79) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-ibm-7.0 (7.0.0-1013.13) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-gcp-lts-22.04 (5.15.0.1118.115) @ jammy2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-nvidia-hwe-24.04-edge (7.0.0-1018.18) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oracle-7.0 (7.0.0-1011.11) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-edge (7.0.0-1014.14~24.04.1) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-fde-lts-22.04 (5.15.0.1122.131) @ jammy2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oracle-edge (5.15.0.1114.120~20.04.1) @ focal2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oracle-edge (7.0.0-1011.11~24.04.1) @ noble2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-gcp-edge (5.15.0.1118.128~20.04.1) @ focal2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oem-7.0 (7.0.0-1013.13) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-raspi-realtime-7.0 (7.0.0-1019.19) @ resolute2026-10-19ubuntu

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(6 across 4 ecosystems)
Debian:11(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux5.10.103-1 ... 5.10.92-2 (55 versions)
  • every version up to 5.10.262-1: fixed in 5.10.262-1
—
linux-6.16.1.106-3~deb11u1 ... 6.1.177-1~deb11u1 (22 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.180-1~deb11u1: fixed in 6.1.180-1~deb11u1
—
Debian:12(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 6.1.99-1 (55 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.180-1: fixed in 6.1.180-1
—
linux-6.12—
  • every version up to 6.12.100-1~deb12u1: fixed in 6.12.100-1~deb12u1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.38-1 ... 6.12.95-1~bpo12+1 (30 versions)
  • every version up to 6.12.96-1: fixed in 6.12.96-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.1~rc7-1~exp1 (159 versions)
  • every version up to 7.1.4-1: fixed in 7.1.4-1
—

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Additional Vendor Advisories

(20)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 23× in last 7d / 77× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 339 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 239 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-10-19 21:41 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-19 21:41 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-10-19 21:40 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  4. 2026-10-19 20:45 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-19 20:45 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-19 20:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  7. 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 31st percentile
  8. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 31st percentile
  9. 2026-10-18 03:22 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 31st percentile
  11. 2026-10-16 17:15 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-16 17:15 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-10-16 17:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  14. 2026-10-16 16:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 31st percentile
  15. 2026-10-16 15:51 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-16 15:51 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-10-16 15:51 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  18. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 31st percentile
  19. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 31st percentile
  20. 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  21. 2026-10-13 11:41 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-13 11:41 UTCVendor advisory
  23. 2026-10-13 11:41 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  24. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  25. 2026-10-12 15:48 UTCEG score recompute
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-11 19:32 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-11 16:47 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-11 14:09 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  5. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  6. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  7. 2026-10-08 17:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  8. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  9. 2026-10-07 04:36 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-07 04:36 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-07 04:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  12. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  13. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  14. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  15. 2026-10-04 07:32 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-04 07:32 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-10-04 07:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  18. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  19. 2026-10-02 19:25 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-02 19:25 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-10-02 19:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  22. 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  23. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  24. 2026-10-01 15:51 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-10-01 15:50 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  26. 2026-10-01 04:15 UTCEG score recompute
  27. 2026-10-01 04:15 UTCVendor advisory
  28. 2026-10-01 04:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  29. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  30. 2026-09-29 08:30 UTCEG score recompute
  31. 2026-09-29 08:30 UTCVendor advisory
  32. 2026-09-29 08:30 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  33. 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  34. 2026-09-28 04:13 UTCEG score recompute
  35. 2026-09-28 04:13 UTCVendor advisory
  36. 2026-09-28 04:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  37. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  38. 2026-09-25 09:44 UTCEG score recompute
  39. 2026-09-25 09:44 UTCVendor advisory
  40. 2026-09-25 09:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  41. 2026-09-24 09:46 UTCVendor advisory
  42. 2026-09-24 09:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  43. 2026-09-23 22:10 UTCEG score recompute
  44. 2026-09-23 22:10 UTCVendor advisory
  45. 2026-09-23 22:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  46. 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  47. 2026-09-23 09:38 UTCVendor advisory
  48. 2026-09-23 09:38 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  49. 2026-09-22 22:02 UTCEG score recompute
  50. 2026-09-22 22:02 UTCVendor advisory
  51. 2026-09-22 22:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  52. 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  53. 2026-09-20 01:26 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-09-20 01:26 UTCVendor advisory
  55. 2026-09-20 01:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  56. 2026-09-18 19:47 UTCEG score recompute
  57. 2026-09-18 19:47 UTCVendor advisory
  58. 2026-09-18 19:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  59. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  60. 2026-09-18 02:47 UTCEG score recompute
  61. 2026-09-18 02:47 UTCVendor advisory
  62. 2026-09-18 02:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  63. 2026-09-17 01:54 UTCEG score recompute
  64. 2026-09-17 01:54 UTCVendor advisory
  65. 2026-09-17 01:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  66. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  67. 2026-09-16 06:31 UTCEG score recompute
  68. 2026-09-16 06:31 UTCVendor advisory
  69. 2026-09-16 06:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  70. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  71. 2026-09-15 09:24 UTCEG score recompute
  72. 2026-09-15 09:24 UTCVendor advisory
  73. 2026-09-15 09:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  74. 2026-09-14 15:53 UTCVendor advisory
  75. 2026-09-14 15:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f9mw-ffqj-qm54 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-64374?
CVE-2026-64374 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on July 25, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/rt: Have RTPUSHIPI be default off for non PREEMPT_RT RT migration is done aggressively. When a CPU schedules out a high priority RT task for a lower priority task, it will look to see if there's any RT tasks that are waiting…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-64374 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-64374 was published on July 25, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 19, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-64374 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-64374 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (31st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-64374?
CVE-2026-64374 has a CVSS base score of 7.5 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-64374?
A fix for CVE-2026-64374 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-64374 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-64374

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-64374?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.