In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
spi: imx: reconfigure for PIO when DMA cannot be started
When spi_imx_can_dma() selects DMA, the ECSPI is configured for DMA:
spi_imx_setupxfer() sets CTRL.SMC and clears dynamic_burst, and
spi_imx_dma_transfer() programs the dynamic-burst BURST_LENGTH and the
SDMA watermarks.
If the DMA descriptor cannot be prepared (dmaengine_prep_slave_single()
returns NULL), the transfer is failed with SPI_TRANS_FAIL_NO_START and
falls back to PIO. The dynamic-burst DMA path uses its own bounce
buffers instead of the SPI core's mapping, so xfer->{tx,rx}_sg_mapped
are not set and the core's DMA->PIO retry is skipped; the driver falls
back to PIO internally. But none of the DMA-mode configuration is
undone, so the PIO transfer runs with CTRL.SMC set, the wrong burst
length and dynamic_burst cleared, and the transferred data is corrupted.
This is easily hit on i.MX8MP boards that describe ECSPI DMA in the
device tree but run SDMA on ROM firmware (no external sdma-imx7d.bin):
every ECSPI DMA prepare fails. An Infineon SLB9670 TPM on ECSPI1 then
returns shifted TPM2_GetCapability data, is flagged "field failure
mode", /dev/tpmrm0 is never created.
Set controller->fallback before re-running spi_imx_setupxfer() so the
ECSPI is reconfigured exactly like a normal PIO transfer. With
controller->fallback set, spi_imx_setupxfer() sees spi_imx_can_dma()
return false, so it clears spi_imx->usedma and reprograms the controller
(clears CTRL.SMC, restores dynamic_burst and the PIO burst length). No
explicit spi_imx->usedma = false is needed: setupxfer() already updates
it from the can_dma() result.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 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 2026-10-17). 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
- 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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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'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