In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
vhost_iotlb: bound map allocation in add_range
vhost_iotlb_add_range_ctx() only retires an old entry when the table
has a non-zero limit, has exactly reached that limit and has
VHOST_IOTLB_FLAG_RETIRE set. Non-retiring tables can keep allocating
entries after reaching their configured limit.
Existing vhost devices allocate their IOTLB with max_iotlb_entries from
vhost.c, which defaults to 2048 and is tunable by module parameter. Use
the caller-provided limit at the allocation point instead of adding a
separate default in the common IOTLB helper, and reject non-positive
values in vhost paths that can report an error.
Other vhost IOTLB users should not create zero-limit tables when entries
can be populated from userspace or guest-controlled requests. Add
caller-side max_iotlb_entries parameters for mlx5 vDPA, VDUSE and
vhost-vDPA. Reject non-positive VDUSE and vhost-vDPA values, and require
at least two entries for vdpa_sim and mlx5 vDPA paths that install
full-range mappings, since those mappings are split into two IOTLB
entries.
Handle full-range mappings in the common helper by checking that the
IOTLB can hold both split entries before inserting the first half. This
avoids returning an error after leaving a half mapping behind.
When the table is full, keep the existing retire behavior for retiring
tables and return -ENOSPC for non-retiring tables. Reuse the retired map
node instead of freeing it and allocating a replacement, so a stream of
IOTLB updates cannot keep forcing GFP_ATOMIC allocations after the table
has reached its limit. If a zero-limit IOTLB still reaches the common
helper, treat it as a configuration error and return -EINVAL.
I found this bug myself, though the patch was written with AI assistance.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 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 2026-10-29). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 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 every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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)60 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 partial (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