In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bnxt_en: Fix XDP_TX path
For XDP_TX action in bnxt_rx_xdp(), clearing of the event flags is not
correct. __bnxt_poll_work() -> bnxt_rx_pkt() -> bnxt_rx_xdp() may be
looping within NAPI and some event flags may be set in earlier
iterations. In particular, if BNXT_TX_EVENT is set earlier indicating
some XDP_TX packets are ready and pending, it will be cleared if it is
XDP_TX action again. Normally, we will set BNXT_TX_EVENT again when we
successfully call __bnxt_xmit_xdp(). But if the TX ring has no more
room, the flag will not be set. This will cause the TX producer to be
ahead but the driver will not hit the TX doorbell.
For multi-buf XDP_TX, there is no need to clear the event flags and set
BNXT_AGG_EVENT. The BNXT_AGG_EVENT flag should have been set earlier in
bnxt_rx_pkt().
The visible symptom of this is that the RX ring associated with the
TX XDP ring will eventually become empty and all packets will be dropped.
Because this condition will cause the driver to not refill the RX ring
seeing that the TX ring has forever pending XDP_TX packets.
The fix is to only clear BNXT_RX_EVENT when we have successfully
called __bnxt_xmit_xdp().
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.5 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-27). 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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