In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
vhost: reset the vring metadata cache on vring reconfiguration
vq->meta_iotlb[] caches the vhost_iotlb_map that backs each vring
metadata region, and iotlb_access_ok() returns early on a cache hit,
taking the hit as proof that the region has already been validated:
if (vhost_vq_meta_fetch(vq, addr, len, type))
return true;
The cache is reset on VHOST_IOTLB_UPDATE and VHOST_IOTLB_INVALIDATE, on
device IOTLB (re)initialisation and on vq reset, but not when
VHOST_SET_VRING_ADDR replaces vq->desc, vq->avail and vq->used, nor when
VHOST_SET_VRING_NUM changes the region sizes.
With a device IOTLB attached both ioctls are accepted while the vq is
live, and neither validates the addresses at ioctl time: vq_access_ok()
and vq_log_used_access_ok() return true early because the addresses are
GIOVAs, deferring validation to prefetch time. Once the cache has been
populated that deferred validation no longer runs -- vq_meta_prefetch()
hits the stale entry and returns true -- and vhost_vq_meta_fetch() keeps
translating through the old mapping as
map->addr + addr - map->start
for an address the mapping no longer covers. vhost_copy_to_user() and
vhost_copy_from_user() consume the result with __copy_to_user() and
__copy_from_user(), which do not check it either, so a subsequent used
ring update or descriptor fetch accesses memory outside the region the
IOTLB actually maps.
Reset the metadata cache whenever the vring is reconfigured, so the new
addresses are pushed back through iotlb_access_ok()'s slow path.
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
- 0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. 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, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.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, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation public PoC (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