In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nvmet: fix pre-auth out-of-bounds heap read in Discovery Get Log Page
nvmet_execute_disc_get_log_page() validates only the dword alignment
of the host-supplied Log Page Offset (lpo). The 64-bit offset is then
added to a small kzalloc'd buffer that holds the discovery log page
and the result is passed straight to nvmet_copy_to_sgl(), which
memcpy()s data_len bytes out to the host with no source-side bound
check:
u64 offset = nvmet_get_log_page_offset(req->cmd); /* 64-bit host */
size_t data_len = nvmet_get_log_page_len(req->cmd); /* 32-bit host */
...
if (offset & 0x3) { ... } /* only check */
...
alloc_len = sizeof(*hdr) + entry_size * discovery_log_entries(req);
buffer = kzalloc(alloc_len, GFP_KERNEL);
...
status = nvmet_copy_to_sgl(req, 0, buffer + offset, data_len);
The Discovery controller is unauthenticated -- nvmet_host_allowed()
returns true unconditionally for the discovery subsystem -- so the call
is reachable pre-authentication by any TCP/RDMA/FC peer that can reach
the nvmet target. With a discovery log page of ~1 KiB, an attacker
requesting up to 4 KiB starting at offset == alloc_len reads the next
slab page out and gets its content returned over the fabric (an
empirical run on a default nvmet-tcp loopback target leaked 81
canonical kernel pointers in one Get Log Page response). Pointing the
offset at unmapped kernel memory faults the in-kernel memcpy and
crashes (or panics, on panic_on_oops=1) the target host instead.
The attacker-controlled source-side offset pattern
"nvmet_copy_to_sgl(req, 0, buffer + ATTACKER_OFFSET, ...)" is unique
to nvmet_execute_disc_get_log_page in the entire nvmet codebase: every
other Get Log Page handler in admin-cmd.c either ignores lpo (and
silently starts every response at offset 0) or tracks a local
destination offset with a fixed source pointer.
Validate the host-supplied offset against the log page size, cap the
copy length to what is actually available, and zero-fill any remainder
of the host transfer buffer. The zero-fill matches the existing
short-response pattern in nvmet_execute_get_log_changed_ns()
(admin-cmd.c) and prevents leaking transport SGL contents when the
host asks for more bytes than the log page contains.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.1 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.8% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-31). 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