CVE-2023-53087

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 2025-05-02. 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-2025-13186 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-5w85-r73p-4mf2 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

5.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (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 available — apply it.

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

drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers

Users reported oopses on list corruptions when using i915 perf with a number of concurrently running graphics applications. Root cause analysis pointed at an issue in barrier processing code -- a race among perf open / close replacing active barriers with perf requests on kernel context and concurrent barrier preallocate / acquire operations performed during user context first pin / last unpin.

When adding a request to a composite tracker, we try to reuse an existing fence tracker, already allocated and registered with that composite. The tracker we obtain may already track another fence, may be an idle barrier, or an active barrier.

If the tracker we get occurs a non-idle barrier then we try to delete that barrier from a list of barrier tasks it belongs to. However, while doing that we don't respect return value from a function that performs the barrier deletion. Should the deletion ever fail, we would end up reusing the tracker still registered as a barrier task. Since the same structure field is reused with both fence callback lists and barrier tasks list, list corruptions would likely occur.

Barriers are now deleted from a barrier tasks list by temporarily removing the list content, traversing that content with skip over the node to be deleted, then populating the list back with the modified content. Should that intentionally racy concurrent deletion attempts be not serialized, one or more of those may fail because of the list being temporary empty.

Related code that ignores the results of barrier deletion was initially introduced in v5.4 by commit d8af05ff38ae ("drm/i915: Allow sharing the idle-barrier from other kernel requests"). However, all users of the barrier deletion routine were apparently serialized at that time, then the issue didn't exhibit itself. Results of git bisect with help of a newly developed igt@gem_barrier_race@remote-request IGT test indicate that list corruptions might start to appear after commit 311770173fac ("drm/i915/gt: Schedule request retirement when timeline idles"), introduced in v5.5.

Respect results of barrier deletion attempts -- mark the barrier as idle only if successfully deleted from the list. Then, before proceeding with setting our fence as the one currently tracked, make sure that the tracker we've got is not a non-idle barrier. If that check fails then don't use that tracker but go back and try to acquire a new, usable one.

v3: use unlikely() to document what outcome we expect (Andi),

  • fix bad grammar in commit description.
v2: no code changes,
  • blame commit 311770173fac ("drm/i915/gt: Schedule request retirement
when timeline idles"), v5.5, not commit d8af05ff38ae ("drm/i915: Allow sharing the idle-barrier from other kernel requests"), v5.4,
  • reword commit description.

(cherry picked from commit 506006055769b10d1b2b4e22f636f3b45e0e9fc7)

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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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 available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
12th
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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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)14 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 total (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

May 2, 2025

Last Modified

October 15, 2026

Advisory Details (5)

Auto-updated Oct 15, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e0e6b416b25ee14716f3549e0cbec1011b193809
Web page

drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9159db27fb19bbf1c91b5c9d5285e66cc96cc5ff
Web page

drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6ab7d33617559cced63d467928f478ea5c459021
Web page

drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5e784a7d07af42057c0576fb647b482f4cb0dc2c
Web page

drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5c7591b8574c52c56b3994c2fbef1a3a311b5715

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2023-53087(2)

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

Patch Availability(3)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatkernel-0:4.18.0-513.5.1.el8_92023-11-14redhat
redhatkernel-0:5.14.0-362.8.1.el9_32023-11-07redhat
linuxKernel @ 5.10.176 (fixes >=5.5.0)—osv

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(4 across 4 ecosystems)
Debian:11(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux5.10.103-1 ... 5.10.92-2 (25 versions)
  • every version up to 5.10.178-1: fixed in 5.10.178-1
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.1.25-1: fixed in 6.1.25-1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.1.25-1: fixed in 6.1.25-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.1.25-1: fixed in 6.1.25-1
—

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 38× 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 93 of 196 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. 7 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 103 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  3. 2026-10-31 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  5. 2026-10-29 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  6. 2026-10-28 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  7. 2026-10-27 19:55 UTCOSV refresh
  8. 2026-10-27 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  9. 2026-10-26 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  10. 2026-10-25 17:28 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-25 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  12. 2026-10-24 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  13. 2026-10-23 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  14. 2026-10-22 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  15. 2026-10-21 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  16. 2026-10-20 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  17. 2026-10-19 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  18. 2026-10-18 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  19. 2026-10-18 07:41 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-17 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  21. 2026-10-16 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  22. 2026-10-15 23:11 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-15 23:11 UTCVendor advisory
  24. 2026-10-15 23:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5w85-r73p-4mf2 · GitHub CVSS 5.5
  25. 2026-10-15 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
Show 68 more
  1. 2026-10-14 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  2. 2026-10-13 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  3. 2026-10-12 18:13 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-12 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  5. 2026-10-11 21:38 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  7. 2026-10-10 19:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  8. 2026-10-09 20:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  9. 2026-10-08 17:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  10. 2026-10-07 23:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  11. 2026-10-06 15:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  12. 2026-10-05 17:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  13. 2026-10-04 23:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  14. 2026-10-03 14:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  15. 2026-10-01 19:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  16. 2026-09-30 16:37 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-09-30 15:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  18. 2026-09-29 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  19. 2026-09-28 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  20. 2026-09-26 21:11 UTCOSV refresh
  21. 2026-09-26 00:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  22. 2026-09-24 14:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  23. 2026-09-23 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  24. 2026-09-20 20:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  25. 2026-09-18 19:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  26. 2026-09-16 14:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  27. 2026-09-16 05:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  28. 2026-09-15 03:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  29. 2026-09-13 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  30. 2026-09-12 14:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  31. 2026-09-11 14:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  32. 2026-09-11 09:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  33. 2026-09-08 21:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  34. 2026-09-07 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  35. 2026-09-07 06:48 UTCOSV refresh
  36. 2026-09-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  37. 2026-09-05 15:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  38. 2026-09-04 13:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  39. 2026-09-04 05:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  40. 2026-09-02 14:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  41. 2026-09-01 13:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  42. 2026-09-01 04:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  43. 2026-08-30 19:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  44. 2026-08-30 01:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  45. 2026-08-28 21:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  46. 2026-08-27 14:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  47. 2026-08-26 14:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  48. 2026-08-23 00:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  49. 2026-08-21 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  50. 2026-08-20 22:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  51. 2026-08-20 16:31 UTCOSV refresh
  52. 2026-08-19 17:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  53. 2026-08-18 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  54. 2026-08-16 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  55. 2026-08-16 02:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  56. 2026-08-15 01:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  57. 2026-08-13 21:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  58. 2026-08-12 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  59. 2026-08-11 13:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  60. 2026-08-10 23:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  61. 2026-08-09 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  62. 2026-08-08 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  63. 2026-08-07 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  64. 2026-08-06 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  65. 2026-08-05 19:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  66. 2026-08-05 10:20 UTCEG score recompute
  67. 2026-08-05 10:20 UTCVendor advisory
  68. 2026-08-05 10:20 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5w85-r73p-4mf2 · GitHub CVSS 5.5

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2023-53087?
CVE-2023-53087 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on May 2, 2025. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/i915/active: Fix misuse of non-idle barriers as fence trackers Users reported oopses on list corruptions when using i915 perf with a number of concurrently running graphics applications. Root cause analysis pointed at an issue…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2023-53087 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2023-53087 was published on May 2, 2025. 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 October 15, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2023-53087 actively exploited?
CVE-2023-53087 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (12th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2023-53087?
CVE-2023-53087 has a CVSS v3 base score of 5.5 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2023-53087?
A fix for CVE-2023-53087 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2023-53087 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-2023-53087

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2023-53087?

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