In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ice: reject out-of-range ptype in ice_parser_profile_init
set_bit(rslt->ptype, prof->ptypes) operates on a DECLARE_BITMAP of
ICE_FLOW_PTYPE_MAX (1024) bits. Nothing prevents a malicious VF from
providing ptype >= 1024 through VIRTCHNL, resulting in a write past
the end of the bitmap and a kernel page fault.
Reproduced with a custom kernel module injecting a crafted
VIRTCHNL_OP_ADD_RSS_CFG on E810-C QSFP (8086:1592),
FW 4.91 0x800214af 1.3909.0, ICE COMMS DDP 1.3.53.0,
kernel 7.1.0-rc1.
crash_parser: ice_parser_profile_init @ ffffffffc0d61b60
crash_parser: setting ptype=0xffff (max valid=1023)
crash_parser: calling ice_parser_profile_init -- expect OOB crash!
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000
Oops: Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP NOPTI
CPU: 56 UID: 0 PID: 165011 Comm: insmod Kdump: loaded Tainted: G S U OE 7.1.0-rc1 #1
Hardware name: Intel Corporation S2600BPB/S2600BPB
RIP: 0010:ice_parser_profile_init+0x2d/0x1d0 [ice]
Call Trace:
? __pfx_ice_parser_profile_init+0x10/0x10 [ice]
crash_init+0x127/0xff0 [crash_parser]
do_one_initcall+0x45/0x310
do_init_module+0x64/0x270
init_module_from_file+0xcc/0xf0
idempotent_init_module+0x17b/0x280
__x64_sys_finit_module+0x6e/0xe0
Bail out early with -EINVAL when ptype is out of range.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% 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; 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