CVE-2021-46964

MEDIUMNVD 5.55.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 5.5 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2024-02-27. NVD baseline CVSS 5.5; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3

Also known asEUVD-2021-33612 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-pvcm-vr92-9wx7 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

5.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorNo release containing the referenced fix is confirmed: check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 5.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but no release containing it is confirmed — find the release that contains it; until it is applied, mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation).

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

scsi: qla2xxx: Reserve extra IRQ vectors

Commit a6dcfe08487e ("scsi: qla2xxx: Limit interrupt vectors to number of CPUs") lowers the number of allocated MSI-X vectors to the number of CPUs.

That breaks vector allocation assumptions in qla83xx_iospace_config(), qla24xx_enable_msix() and qla2x00_iospace_config(). Either of the functions computes maximum number of qpairs as:

ha->max_qpairs = ha->msix_count - 1 (MB interrupt) - 1 (default response queue) - 1 (ATIO, in dual or pure target mode)

max_qpairs is set to zero in case of two CPUs and initiator mode. The number is then used to allocate ha->queue_pair_map inside qla2x00_alloc_queues(). No allocation happens and ha->queue_pair_map is left NULL but the driver thinks there are queue pairs available.

qla2xxx_queuecommand() tries to find a qpair in the map and crashes:

if (ha->mqenable) { uint32_t tag; uint16_t hwq; struct qla_qpair *qpair = NULL;

tag = blk_mq_unique_tag(cmd->request); hwq = blk_mq_unique_tag_to_hwq(tag); qpair = ha->queue_pair_map[hwq]; # <- HERE

if (qpair) return qla2xxx_mqueuecommand(host, cmd, qpair); }

BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page PGD 0 P4D 0 Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI CPU: 0 PID: 72 Comm: kworker/u4:3 Tainted: G W 5.10.0-rc1+ #25 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.0.0-prebuilt.qemu-project.org 04/01/2014 Workqueue: scsi_wq_7 fc_scsi_scan_rport [scsi_transport_fc] RIP: 0010:qla2xxx_queuecommand+0x16b/0x3f0 [qla2xxx] Call Trace: scsi_queue_rq+0x58c/0xa60 blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x2b7/0x6f0 ? __sbitmap_get_word+0x2a/0x80 __blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xb8/0x170 blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x2b/0x50 __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0x49/0xb0 __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue+0xfb/0x150 blk_mq_sched_insert_request+0xbe/0x110 blk_execute_rq+0x45/0x70 __scsi_execute+0x10e/0x250 scsi_probe_and_add_lun+0x228/0xda0 __scsi_scan_target+0xf4/0x620 ? __pm_runtime_resume+0x4f/0x70 scsi_scan_target+0x100/0x110 fc_scsi_scan_rport+0xa1/0xb0 [scsi_transport_fc] process_one_work+0x1ea/0x3b0 worker_thread+0x28/0x3b0 ? process_one_work+0x3b0/0x3b0 kthread+0x112/0x130 ? kthread_park+0x80/0x80 ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30

The driver should allocate enough vectors to provide every CPU it's own HW queue and still handle reserved (MB, RSP, ATIO) interrupts.

The change fixes the crash on dual core VM and prevents unbalanced QP allocation where nr_hw_queues is two less than the number of CPUs.

CVSS v3
5.5
EG Score
5.5MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
25
EG Risk 25/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity55% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.5 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
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.
Action: A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
13th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-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 2026-10-25). 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.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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 referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.

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.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.

The score's inputs: 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

Published

February 27, 2024

Last Modified

January 8, 2025

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 36× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. 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. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 97 of 197 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 3 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 100 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  3. 2026-10-31 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  5. 2026-10-29 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  6. 2026-10-28 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  7. 2026-10-27 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  8. 2026-10-26 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 18:18 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-25 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  11. 2026-10-24 21:52 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-24 21:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-pvcm-vr92-9wx7 · GitHub CVSS 5.5
  13. 2026-10-24 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  14. 2026-10-23 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  15. 2026-10-22 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  16. 2026-10-21 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  17. 2026-10-20 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  18. 2026-10-19 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  19. 2026-10-18 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  20. 2026-10-18 08:50 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-17 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  22. 2026-10-16 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  23. 2026-10-15 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  24. 2026-10-14 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  25. 2026-10-13 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
Show 72 more
  1. 2026-10-12 19:05 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-12 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  3. 2026-10-11 23:31 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-11 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  5. 2026-10-10 19:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  6. 2026-10-09 20:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  7. 2026-10-08 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  8. 2026-10-07 23:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  9. 2026-10-06 15:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  10. 2026-10-05 17:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  11. 2026-10-04 23:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  12. 2026-10-03 14:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  13. 2026-10-02 16:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  14. 2026-09-30 15:45 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-09-30 15:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  16. 2026-09-29 15:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  17. 2026-09-28 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  18. 2026-09-26 15:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  19. 2026-09-26 00:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  20. 2026-09-24 14:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  21. 2026-09-23 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  22. 2026-09-22 14:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  23. 2026-09-21 20:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  24. 2026-09-20 20:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  25. 2026-09-19 15:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  26. 2026-09-18 19:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  27. 2026-09-17 19:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  28. 2026-09-16 14:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  29. 2026-09-15 03:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  30. 2026-09-12 14:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  31. 2026-09-11 14:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  32. 2026-09-11 09:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  33. 2026-09-08 21:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  34. 2026-09-07 15:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  35. 2026-09-06 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  36. 2026-09-05 15:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  37. 2026-09-04 13:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  38. 2026-09-04 05:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  39. 2026-09-02 14:09 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  40. 2026-09-01 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  41. 2026-08-30 19:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  42. 2026-08-30 01:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  43. 2026-08-27 14:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  44. 2026-08-26 14:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  45. 2026-08-25 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  46. 2026-08-24 14:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  47. 2026-08-21 23:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  48. 2026-08-20 22:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  49. 2026-08-19 17:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  50. 2026-08-18 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  51. 2026-08-17 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  52. 2026-08-16 14:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  53. 2026-08-16 02:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  54. 2026-08-15 01:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  55. 2026-08-13 21:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  56. 2026-08-12 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  57. 2026-08-11 13:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  58. 2026-08-09 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  59. 2026-08-08 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  60. 2026-08-07 16:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  61. 2026-08-06 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  62. 2026-08-05 19:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  63. 2026-08-04 15:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  64. 2026-08-04 10:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  65. 2026-08-03 10:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  66. 2026-08-02 02:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  67. 2026-08-01 04:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  68. 2026-07-30 01:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  69. 2026-07-28 15:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  70. 2026-07-26 14:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  71. 2026-07-25 14:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  72. 2026-07-24 14:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2021-46964?
CVE-2021-46964 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on February 27, 2024. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Reserve extra IRQ vectors Commit a6dcfe08487e ("scsi: qla2xxx: Limit interrupt vectors to number of CPUs") lowers the number of allocated MSI-X vectors to the number of CPUs. That breaks vector allocation assumptions…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2021-46964 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2021-46964 was published on February 27, 2024. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of January 8, 2025; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2021-46964 actively exploited?
CVE-2021-46964 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (13th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2021-46964?
CVE-2021-46964 has a CVSS v3 base score of 5.5 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2021-46964?
A fix for CVE-2021-46964 is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but EchelonGraph has no release containing it on record. Check that reference and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains the fix and update to it; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2021-46964

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2021-46964?

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