In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
x86/lib: Revert to _ASM_EXTABLE_UA() for {get,put}_user() fixups
During memory error injection test on kernels >= v6.4, the kernel panics
like below. However, this issue couldn't be reproduced on kernels <= v6.3.
mce: [Hardware Error]: CPU 296: Machine Check Exception: f Bank 1: bd80000000100134
mce: [Hardware Error]: RIP 10: {__get_user_nocheck_4+0x6/0x20}
mce: [Hardware Error]: TSC 411a93533ed ADDR 346a8730040 MISC 86
mce: [Hardware Error]: PROCESSOR 0:a06d0 TIME 1706000767 SOCKET 1 APIC 211 microcode 80001490
mce: [Hardware Error]: Run the above through 'mcelog --ascii'
mce: [Hardware Error]: Machine check: Data load in unrecoverable area of kernel
Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal local machine check
The MCA code can recover from an in-kernel #MC if the fixup type is
EX_TYPE_UACCESS, explicitly indicating that the kernel is attempting to
access userspace memory. However, if the fixup type is EX_TYPE_DEFAULT
the only thing that is raised for an in-kernel #MC is a panic.
ex_handler_uaccess() would warn if users gave a non-canonical addresses
(with bit 63 clear) to {get, put}_user(), which was unexpected.
Therefore, commit
b19b74bc99b1 ("x86/mm: Rework address range check in get_user() and put_user()")
replaced _ASM_EXTABLE_UA() with _ASM_EXTABLE() for {get, put}_user()
fixups. However, the new fixup type EX_TYPE_DEFAULT results in a panic.
Commit
6014bc27561f ("x86-64: make access_ok() independent of LAM")
added the check gp_fault_address_ok() right before the WARN_ONCE() in
ex_handler_uaccess() to not warn about non-canonical user addresses due
to LAM.
With that in place, revert back to _ASM_EXTABLE_UA() for {get,put}_user()
exception fixups in order to be able to handle in-kernel MCEs correctly
again.
[ bp: Massage commit message. ]
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
- 0.3% 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 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