In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
gve: fix Rx queue stall on alloc failure
When the system is under extreme memory pressure, page allocations can
fail during the Rx buffer refill loop. If the number of buffers posted
to hardware falls below a critical low threshold and the refill loop
exits due to allocation failures, the queue can stall:
- The device drops incoming packets because there are no descriptors.
- Since no packets are processed, no Rx completions are generated.
- Because no completions occur, NAPI is never scheduled, preventing
the refill loop from running again even after memory is freed.
This results in a permanent queue stall.
Resolve this by introducing a starvation recovery timer for each Rx queue.
If the number of buffers posted to hardware falls below a critical low
threshold, start a timer to periodically reschedule NAPI. Once NAPI runs
and successfully refills the queue above the threshold, the timer is
not rescheduled.
The threshold is set to 32 because a single maximum-sized Receive Segment
Coalescing (RSC) packet can consume up to 19 descriptors in the Rx path.
Lower thresholds (such as 8 or 16) would be insufficient to process a
complete maximum-sized RSC packet, risking packet drops or unexpected
hardware behavior under memory pressure. Setting the threshold to 32
guarantees a safe margin to handle at least one full RSC packet.
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
- 0.5% 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