In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tipc: fix integer overflow in tipc_recvmsg() and tipc_recvstream()
In tipc_recvmsg(), the copy length is computed as:
copy = min_t(int, dlen - offset, buflen);
buflen is size_t but min_t(int, ...) casts it to int. When buflen
exceeds INT_MAX (e.g. 0xFFFFFFFF via io_uring provided buffers), it
wraps negative, wins the comparison, and the negative copy length
propagates to simple_copy_to_iter() where int-to-size_t promotion
makes it SIZE_MAX, triggering a WARN_ON. tipc_recvstream() has the
same pattern.
Kernel panic - not syncing: kernel: panic_on_warn set ...
RIP: 0010:simple_copy_to_iter+0x9e/0xd0 (net/core/datagram.c:521)
Call Trace:
__skb_datagram_iter+0x123/0x8b0 (net/core/datagram.c:402)
skb_copy_datagram_iter+0x77/0x1a0 (net/core/datagram.c:534)
tipc_recvmsg+0x3d7/0xe80 (net/tipc/socket.c:1934)
io_recvmsg+0x47e/0xda0
Fix by changing min_t(int, ...) to min_t(size_t, ...) in both
functions. The result is always <= (dlen - offset), which is bounded
by TIPC maximum message size (0x1ffff bytes), so the implicit
narrowing on assignment to int copy is always safe.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-17). 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
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA 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 BOD 26-04 block below.
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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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