In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
vhost: fix hung thread due to erroneous iotlb entries
In vhost_iotlb_add_range_ctx(), range size can overflow to 0 when
start is 0 and last is ULONG_MAX. One instance where it can happen
is when userspace sends an IOTLB message with iova=size=uaddr=0
(vhost_process_iotlb_msg). So, an entry with size = 0, start = 0,
last = ULONG_MAX ends up in the iotlb. Next time a packet is sent,
iotlb_access_ok() loops indefinitely due to that erroneous entry.
Call Trace:
iotlb_access_ok+0x21b/0x3e0 drivers/vhost/vhost.c:1340
vq_meta_prefetch+0xbc/0x280 drivers/vhost/vhost.c:1366
vhost_transport_do_send_pkt+0xe0/0xfd0 drivers/vhost/vsock.c:104
vhost_worker+0x23d/0x3d0 drivers/vhost/vhost.c:372
kthread+0x2e9/0x3a0 kernel/kthread.c:377
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:295
Reported by syzbot at:
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=0abd373e2e50d704db87
To fix this, do two things:
- Return -EINVAL in vhost_chr_write_iter() when userspace asks to map
a range with size 0.
- Fix vhost_iotlb_add_range_ctx() to handle the range [0, ULONG_MAX]
by splitting it into two entries.
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