In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
pstore/ram: Check start of empty przs during init
After commit 30696378f68a ("pstore/ram: Do not treat empty buffers as
valid"), initialization would assume a prz was valid after seeing that
the buffer_size is zero (regardless of the buffer start position). This
unchecked start value means it could be outside the bounds of the buffer,
leading to future access panics when written to:
sysdump_panic_event+0x3b4/0x5b8
atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x54/0x90
panic+0x1c8/0x42c
die+0x29c/0x2a8
die_kernel_fault+0x68/0x78
__do_kernel_fault+0x1c4/0x1e0
do_bad_area+0x40/0x100
do_translation_fault+0x68/0x80
do_mem_abort+0x68/0xf8
el1_da+0x1c/0xc0
__raw_writeb+0x38/0x174
__memcpy_toio+0x40/0xac
persistent_ram_update+0x44/0x12c
persistent_ram_write+0x1a8/0x1b8
ramoops_pstore_write+0x198/0x1e8
pstore_console_write+0x94/0xe0
...
To avoid this, also check if the prz start is 0 during the initialization
phase. If not, the next prz sanity check case will discover it (start >
size) and zap the buffer back to a sane state.
[kees: update commit log with backtrace and clarifications]
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 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 2026-10-28). 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