In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
memstick: ms_block: reject a card that reports too many blocks
msb_ftl_initialize() computes the zone count from the card block count
with no bound:
msb->zone_count = msb->block_count / MS_BLOCKS_IN_ZONE;
...
for (i = 0; i < msb->zone_count; i++)
msb->free_block_count[i] = MS_BLOCKS_IN_ZONE;
msb->block_count is a card value. msb_read_boot_blocks() reads
number_of_blocks from the card boot page and byte swaps it.
free_block_count is a fixed int[MS_MAX_ZONES]. MS_MAX_ZONES is 16, so the
valid indices are 0 to 15. The init loop above indexes it by zone_count.
msb_mark_block_used() and msb_mark_block_unused() index it by
pba / MS_BLOCKS_IN_ZONE, for pba up to block_count - 1. A card may report
up to 65535 blocks. A block_count above 8192 (MS_MAX_ZONES *
MS_BLOCKS_IN_ZONE) lets the pba index reach 16. That writes past
free_block_count[] and corrupts struct msb_data. A larger count runs the
init loop past the end too.
A real Memory Stick has at most 16 zones. So it has at most 8192 blocks.
msb_ftl_initialize() now rejects a card that reports more than
MS_MAX_ZONES * MS_BLOCKS_IN_ZONE blocks.
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