In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
lib/iov_iter: fix to increase non slab folio refcount
When testing EROFS file-backed mount over v9fs on qemu, I encountered a
folio UAF issue. The page sanity check reports the following call trace.
The root cause is that pages in bvec are coalesced across a folio bounary.
The refcount of all non-slab folios should be increased to ensure
p9_releas_pages can put them correctly.
BUG: Bad page state in process md5sum pfn:18300
page: refcount:0 mapcount:0 mapping:00000000d5ad8e4e index:0x60 pfn:0x18300
head: order:0 mapcount:0 entire_mapcount:0 nr_pages_mapped:0 pincount:0
aops:z_erofs_aops ino:30b0f dentry name(?):"GoogleExtServicesCn.apk"
flags: 0x100000000000041(locked|head|node=0|zone=1)
raw: 0100000000000041 dead000000000100 dead000000000122 ffff888014b13bd0
raw: 0000000000000060 0000000000000020 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
head: 0100000000000041 dead000000000100 dead000000000122 ffff888014b13bd0
head: 0000000000000060 0000000000000020 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
head: 0100000000000000 0000000000000000 ffffffffffffffff 0000000000000000
head: 0000000000000010 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
page dumped because: PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_FREE flag(s) set
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x53/0x70
bad_page+0xd4/0x220
__free_pages_ok+0x76d/0xf30
__folio_put+0x230/0x320
p9_release_pages+0x179/0x1f0
p9_virtio_zc_request+0xa2a/0x1230
p9_client_zc_rpc.constprop.0+0x247/0x700
p9_client_read_once+0x34d/0x810
p9_client_read+0xf3/0x150
v9fs_issue_read+0x111/0x360
netfs_unbuffered_read_iter_locked+0x927/0x1390
netfs_unbuffered_read_iter+0xa2/0xe0
vfs_iocb_iter_read+0x2c7/0x460
erofs_fileio_rq_submit+0x46b/0x5b0
z_erofs_runqueue+0x1203/0x21e0
z_erofs_readahead+0x579/0x8b0
read_pages+0x19f/0xa70
page_cache_ra_order+0x4ad/0xb80
filemap_readahead.isra.0+0xe7/0x150
filemap_get_pages+0x7aa/0x1890
filemap_read+0x320/0xc80
vfs_read+0x6c6/0xa30
ksys_read+0xf9/0x1c0
do_syscall_64+0x9e/0x1a0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x71/0x79
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 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