In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
cxl/mem: Fix no cxl_nvd during pmem region auto-assembling
When CXL subsystem is auto-assembling a pmem region during cxl
endpoint port probing, always hit below calltrace.
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000078
#PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
#PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
RIP: 0010:cxl_pmem_region_probe+0x22e/0x360 [cxl_pmem]
Call Trace:
? __die+0x24/0x70
? page_fault_oops+0x82/0x160
? do_user_addr_fault+0x65/0x6b0
? exc_page_fault+0x7d/0x170
? asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30
? cxl_pmem_region_probe+0x22e/0x360 [cxl_pmem]
? cxl_pmem_region_probe+0x1ac/0x360 [cxl_pmem]
cxl_bus_probe+0x1b/0x60 [cxl_core]
really_probe+0x173/0x410
? __pfx___device_attach_driver+0x10/0x10
__driver_probe_device+0x80/0x170
driver_probe_device+0x1e/0x90
__device_attach_driver+0x90/0x120
bus_for_each_drv+0x84/0xe0
__device_attach+0xbc/0x1f0
bus_probe_device+0x90/0xa0
device_add+0x51c/0x710
devm_cxl_add_pmem_region+0x1b5/0x380 [cxl_core]
cxl_bus_probe+0x1b/0x60 [cxl_core]
The cxl_nvd of the memdev needs to be available during the pmem region
probe. Currently the cxl_nvd is registered after the endpoint port probe.
The endpoint probe, in the case of autoassembly of regions, can cause a
pmem region probe requiring the not yet available cxl_nvd. Adjust the
sequence so this dependency is met.
This requires adding a port parameter to cxl_find_nvdimm_bridge() that
can be used to query the ancestor root port. The endpoint port is not
yet available, but will share a common ancestor with its parent, so
start the query from there instead.
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