CVE-2026-93217

UNRATEDCVSS · not yet scoredTrending — 3 sources updated this week
—
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • No CVSS published and no exploitation signals yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS v2: —Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

mm/madvise: skip device-private PMDs in cold and pageout walks

madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range() takes pmd_trans_huge_lock(), whose pmd_is_huge() check returns true for a device-private PMD. The subsequent !pmd_present() branch has a VM_BUG_ON() asserting migration is the only allowed non-present case; a device-private PMD trips it.

Skip device-private PMDs in that non-present branch and continue to huge_unlock before calling pmd_folio(). Downgrade the check to VM_WARN_ON_ONCE() so an unexpected PMD softleaf logs a warning rather than panicking. Drop the thp_migration_supported() guard: it expands to IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_PMD_SOFTLEAF), and both pmd_is_migration_entry() and pmd_is_device_private_entry() already return false when that config is not selected, so the guard suppresses only the case where the warning would already be silent.

Potential trigger: an HMM-based GPU driver races with madvise(MADV_COLD)/MADV_PAGEOUT: pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) reads true, then migrate_vma_pages() flips the PMD to a device-private entry before the PMD lock is acquired.

CVSS v3
—
EchelonGraph score
Not yet assessedNo source has published severity data for this CVE yet — no CVSS score from NVD or a CNA, no GitHub advisory, and it is not in CISA KEV. This is not a rating of zero; we cannot assess it yet.
EG Score
—
EG Risk
—
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
4th
KEV
Not listed

Published

September 24, 2026

Last Modified

September 24, 2026

References (2)

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-93217(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (176 versions)
  • every version up to 7.2.6-1: fixed in 7.2.6-1
—

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 14× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-10-03 19:49 UTCGHSA enrichment
  3. 2026-10-01 19:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-09-30 18:48 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-09-30 18:48 UTCGHSA enrichment
  6. 2026-09-30 15:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-09-28 13:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-09-28 13:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-09-27 17:36 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-09-27 17:36 UTCGHSA enrichment
  11. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-09-24 16:30 UTCNVD update
  13. 2026-09-24 15:17 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-09-24 15:16 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-93217?
CVE-2026-93217 is a publicly disclosed vulnerability published on September 24, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/madvise: skip device-private PMDs in cold and pageout walks madvisecoldorpageoutpterange() takes pmdtranshugelock(), whose pmdishuge() check returns true for a device-private PMD. The subsequent !pmdpresent() branch has a…
When was CVE-2026-93217 disclosed?
CVE-2026-93217 was first published on September 24, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-93217 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-93217 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (4th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-93217?
No fix for CVE-2026-93217 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-93217 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-93217

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-93217?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs