In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/i915/sseu: fix max_subslices array-index-out-of-bounds access
It seems that commit bc3c5e0809ae ("drm/i915/sseu: Don't try to store EU
mask internally in UAPI format") exposed a potential out-of-bounds
access, reported by UBSAN as following on a laptop with a gen 11 i915
card:
UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_sseu.c:65:27
index 6 is out of range for type 'u16 [6]'
CPU: 2 PID: 165 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted 6.2.0-9-generic #9-Ubuntu
Hardware name: Dell Inc. XPS 13 9300/077Y9N, BIOS 1.11.0 03/22/2022
Call Trace:
show_stack+0x4e/0x61
dump_stack_lvl+0x4a/0x6f
dump_stack+0x10/0x18
ubsan_epilogue+0x9/0x3a
__ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds.cold+0x42/0x47
gen11_compute_sseu_info+0x121/0x130 [i915]
intel_sseu_info_init+0x15d/0x2b0 [i915]
intel_gt_init_mmio+0x23/0x40 [i915]
i915_driver_mmio_probe+0x129/0x400 [i915]
? intel_gt_probe_all+0x91/0x2e0 [i915]
i915_driver_probe+0xe1/0x3f0 [i915]
? drm_privacy_screen_get+0x16d/0x190 [drm]
? acpi_dev_found+0x64/0x80
i915_pci_probe+0xac/0x1b0 [i915]
...
According to the definition of sseu_dev_info, eu_mask->hsw is limited to
a maximum of GEN_MAX_SS_PER_HSW_SLICE (6) sub-slices, but
gen11_sseu_info_init() can potentially set 8 sub-slices, in the
!IS_JSL_EHL(gt->i915) case.
Fix this by reserving up to 8 slots for max_subslices in the eu_mask
struct.
(cherry picked from commit 3cba09a6ac86ea1d456909626eb2685596c07822)
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-27). 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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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