In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fsdax: Fix infinite loop in dax_iomap_rw()
I got an infinite loop and a WARNING report when executing a tail command
in virtiofs.
WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 964 at fs/iomap/iter.c:34 iomap_iter+0x3a2/0x3d0
Modules linked in:
CPU: 10 PID: 964 Comm: tail Not tainted 5.19.0-rc7
Call Trace:
dax_iomap_rw+0xea/0x620
? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x13/0x20
fuse_dax_read_iter+0x47/0x80
fuse_file_read_iter+0xae/0xd0
new_sync_read+0xfe/0x180
? 0xffffffff81000000
vfs_read+0x14d/0x1a0
ksys_read+0x6d/0xf0
__x64_sys_read+0x1a/0x20
do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
The tail command will call read() with a count of 0. In this case,
iomap_iter() will report this WARNING, and always return 1 which casuing
the infinite loop in dax_iomap_rw().
Fixing by checking count whether is 0 in dax_iomap_rw().
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (6.2): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 6.2 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 6.2 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