In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
iommu/amd: Wait for completion instead of returning early in iommu_completion_wait()
need_sync is a per-IOMMU flag shared by all domains and devices behind
that IOMMU. It is set whenever a command is queued with sync == true and
cleared when a completion-wait (CWAIT) command is queued. However, a
cleared need_sync only means that a covering CWAIT has been queued, not
that all previously queued commands have actually completed in hardware.
iommu_completion_wait() read need_sync locklessly and returned early
when it was false. This breaks the "block until all previously queued
commands have completed" contract in a multi-CPU scenario:
CPU2: queue inv-B => need_sync = true
CPU1: queue CWAIT(N); need_sync = false; then wait_on_sem(N)
CPU2: read need_sync == false => return 0 (no wait!)
CPU2 returns without waiting for any sequence number even though its
inv-B may not have completed yet (CWAIT(N), queued after inv-B, has not
been signaled). CPU2 then proceeds to, for example, free page-table
pages while the IOMMU can still walk stale translations, opening a
use-after-free window. This is a logical race in the meaning of the
flag, not a memory-visibility issue, so barriers alone do not help.
Fix it without losing the optimization of avoiding redundant CWAIT
commands: take iommu->lock before testing need_sync, and when it is
false do not return early but wait for the last allocated sequence
number (cmd_sem_val). Since need_sync == false implies no sync command
was queued after the last CWAIT, that CWAIT is FIFO-ordered after every
not-yet-completed command, so waiting for its sequence number guarantees
all prior commands (possibly queued by another CPU) have completed. The
common path with pending work is unchanged and no extra hardware command
is issued.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.8 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