In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
KVM: VMX: Bury Intel PT virtualization (guest/host mode) behind CONFIG_BROKEN
Hide KVM's pt_mode module param behind CONFIG_BROKEN, i.e. disable support
for virtualizing Intel PT via guest/host mode unless BROKEN=y. There are
myriad bugs in the implementation, some of which are fatal to the guest,
and others which put the stability and health of the host at risk.
For guest fatalities, the most glaring issue is that KVM fails to ensure
tracing is disabled, and *stays* disabled prior to VM-Enter, which is
necessary as hardware disallows loading (the guest's) RTIT_CTL if tracing
is enabled (enforced via a VMX consistency check). Per the SDM:
If the logical processor is operating with Intel PT enabled (if
IA32_RTIT_CTL.TraceEn = 1) at the time of VM entry, the "load
IA32_RTIT_CTL" VM-entry control must be 0.
On the host side, KVM doesn't validate the guest CPUID configuration
provided by userspace, and even worse, uses the guest configuration to
decide what MSRs to save/load at VM-Enter and VM-Exit. E.g. configuring
guest CPUID to enumerate more address ranges than are supported in hardware
will result in KVM trying to passthrough, save, and load non-existent MSRs,
which generates a variety of WARNs, ToPA ERRORs in the host, a potential
deadlock, etc.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (6.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 6.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 6.5 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