In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
powerpc/mm: Fix lockup on kernel exec fault
The powerpc kernel is not prepared to handle exec faults from kernel.
Especially, the function is_exec_fault() will return 'false' when an
exec fault is taken by kernel, because the check is based on reading
current->thread.regs->trap which contains the trap from user.
For instance, when provoking a LKDTM EXEC_USERSPACE test,
current->thread.regs->trap is set to SYSCALL trap (0xc00), and
the fault taken by the kernel is not seen as an exec fault by
set_access_flags_filter().
Commit d7df2443cd5f ("powerpc/mm: Fix spurious segfaults on radix
with autonuma") made it clear and handled it properly. But later on
commit d3ca587404b3 ("powerpc/mm: Fix reporting of kernel execute
faults") removed that handling, introducing test based on error_code.
And here is the problem, because on the 603 all upper bits of SRR1
get cleared when the TLB instruction miss handler bails out to ISI.
Until commit cbd7e6ca0210 ("powerpc/fault: Avoid heavy
search_exception_tables() verification"), an exec fault from kernel
at a userspace address was indirectly caught by the lack of entry for
that address in the exception tables. But after that commit the
kernel mainly relies on KUAP or on core mm handling to catch wrong
user accesses. Here the access is not wrong, so mm handles it.
It is a minor fault because PAGE_EXEC is not set,
set_access_flags_filter() should set PAGE_EXEC and voila.
But as is_exec_fault() returns false as explained in the beginning,
set_access_flags_filter() bails out without setting PAGE_EXEC flag,
which leads to a forever minor exec fault.
As the kernel is not prepared to handle such exec faults, the thing to
do is to fire in bad_kernel_fault() for any exec fault taken by the
kernel, as it was prior to commit d3ca587404b3.
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.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 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.
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