In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/xe: Wait on external BO kernel fences in exec IOCTL
Before arming a user job, xe_exec_ioctl() only added the VM's
dma-resv KERNEL slot as a dependency. That slot covers rebinds and
the kernel operations of the VM's private BOs, but not external BOs
(bo->vm == NULL), which carry their kernel operations (evictions,
moves, ...) in their own dma-resv KERNEL slot.
The DMA_RESV_USAGE_KERNEL slot is the cross-driver contract for
memory management operations that must complete before the BO or its
backing store may be used: any accessor is required to wait on the
KERNEL fences before touching the resv. By skipping the external BOs'
KERNEL slots, the exec path violated that contract and could schedule
a user job while a kernel operation on an external BO mapped by the VM
was still in flight, racing against it and potentially reading or
writing memory that was being moved.
Replace the VM-only dependency with an iteration over every object
locked by the exec, adding each object's KERNEL slot as a job
dependency. This covers the VM resv (rebinds and private BOs) as well
as every external BO, mirroring the drm_gpuvm_resv_add_fence() call
that later publishes the job fence to the same set of objects.
Long-running mode continues to skip this, as before.
(cherry picked from commit a6b842acf3ddd1efc53a56de9260cfa718fb35e7)
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
- 0.1% 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 (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