CVE-2026-64130

MEDIUMNVD 5.55.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

Score 5.5 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2026-07-19. NVD baseline CVSS 5.5; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: epss, ghsa, nvd
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
5.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0%CVSS: 5.5Exploit: None knownExposed: 0

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

mm/page_alloc: fix initialization of tags of the huge zero folio with init_on_free

__GFP_ZEROTAGS semantics are currently a bit weird, but effectively this flag is only ever set alongside __GFP_ZERO and __GFP_SKIP_KASAN.

If we run with init_on_free, we will zero out pages during __free_pages_prepare(), to skip zeroing on the allocation path.

However, when allocating with __GFP_ZEROTAG set, post_alloc_hook() will consequently not only skip clearing page content, but also skip clearing tag memory.

Not clearing tags through __GFP_ZEROTAGS is irrelevant for most pages that will get mapped to user space through set_pte_at() later: set_pte_at() and friends will detect that the tags have not been initialized yet (PG_mte_tagged not set), and initialize them.

However, for the huge zero folio, which will be mapped through a PMD marked as special, this initialization will not be performed, ending up exposing whatever tags were still set for the pages.

The docs (Documentation/arch/arm64/memory-tagging-extension.rst) state that allocation tags are set to 0 when a page is first mapped to user space. That no longer holds with the huge zero folio when init_on_free is enabled.

Fix it by decoupling __GFP_ZEROTAGS from __GFP_ZERO, passing to tag_clear_highpages() whether we want to also clear page content.

Invert the meaning of the tag_clear_highpages() return value to have clearer semantics.

Reproduced with the huge zero folio by modifying the check_buffer_fill arm64/mte selftest to use a 2 MiB area, after making sure that pages have a non-0 tag set when freeing (note that, during boot, we will not actually initialize tags, but only set KASAN_TAG_KERNEL in the page flags).

$ ./check_buffer_fill 1..20 ... not ok 17 Check initial tags with private mapping, sync error mode and mmap memory not ok 18 Check initial tags with private mapping, sync error mode and mmap/mprotect memory ...

This code needs more cleanups; we'll tackle that next, like decoupling __GFP_ZEROTAGS from __GFP_SKIP_KASAN.

[[email protected]: s/__GPF_ZERO/__GFP_ZERO/, per David]

CVSS v3
5.5
EG Score
5.5(medium)
EG Risk
29(Track)
EG Risk 29/100SSVC: Track

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity55% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability30% × 15%
Action: Routine — remediate on your standard cadence.
EPSS PROB
0%
EPSS %ILE
2%
KEV
Not listed

Published

July 19, 2026

Last Modified

August 13, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Aug 13, 2026
No patch confirmed yet.
generic

mm/page_alloc: fix initialization of tags of the huge zero folio with init_on_free - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/738d18f1da3513d17b6f7bf30146cc4ac2480ffd
generic

mm/page_alloc: fix initialization of tags of the huge zero folio with init_on_free - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6a288a4ddb4a994490505ab5f41c445f8e6b6467
generic

mm/page_alloc: fix initialization of tags of the huge zero folio with init_on_free - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2f2aec5120b93a8f8b52dc50cdc60dbb8aec72f6

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-64130(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(6)

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFixed inDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.0.9-1~bpo13+1 (141 versions)7.0.12-1

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

All Vendor Advisories

(6)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 12× in last 7d / 72× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 154 total refreshes for this CVE.

  1. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-09-18 04:11 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-09-18 04:11 UTCVendor advisory
  4. 2026-09-18 04:11 UTCGHSA enrichment
  5. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-09-16 12:53 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-09-16 12:53 UTCVendor advisory
  8. 2026-09-16 12:53 UTCGHSA enrichment
  9. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-09-13 18:27 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-09-13 18:27 UTCVendor advisory
  12. 2026-09-13 18:27 UTCGHSA enrichment
  13. 2026-09-12 19:32 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-09-12 19:32 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-09-12 19:32 UTCGHSA enrichment
  16. 2026-09-11 18:40 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-09-11 18:40 UTCVendor advisory
  18. 2026-09-11 18:40 UTCGHSA enrichment
  19. 2026-09-11 14:53 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-09-11 09:37 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-09-08 22:01 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-09-07 23:07 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-09-07 23:07 UTCVendor advisory
  24. 2026-09-07 23:07 UTCGHSA enrichment
  25. 2026-09-07 16:01 UTCEPSS rescore
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-09-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-09-06 12:05 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-09-06 12:04 UTCGHSA enrichment
  4. 2026-09-05 15:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-09-05 09:49 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-09-05 09:49 UTCVendor advisory
  7. 2026-09-05 09:49 UTCGHSA enrichment
  8. 2026-09-04 05:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-09-02 14:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-09-01 13:54 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-09-01 04:40 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-08-31 01:20 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-08-31 01:20 UTCVendor advisory
  14. 2026-08-31 01:20 UTCGHSA enrichment
  15. 2026-08-30 19:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-08-30 02:46 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-08-30 02:46 UTCVendor advisory
  18. 2026-08-30 02:46 UTCGHSA enrichment
  19. 2026-08-30 01:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-08-28 21:42 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-08-27 21:21 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-08-27 21:21 UTCVendor advisory
  23. 2026-08-27 21:21 UTCGHSA enrichment
  24. 2026-08-26 22:14 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-08-26 22:14 UTCVendor advisory
  26. 2026-08-26 22:14 UTCGHSA enrichment
  27. 2026-08-26 14:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  28. 2026-08-25 22:43 UTCEG score recompute
  29. 2026-08-25 22:43 UTCVendor advisory
  30. 2026-08-25 22:43 UTCGHSA enrichment
  31. 2026-08-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  32. 2026-08-24 23:37 UTCEG score recompute
  33. 2026-08-24 23:37 UTCVendor advisory
  34. 2026-08-24 23:37 UTCGHSA enrichment
  35. 2026-08-24 01:01 UTCVendor advisory
  36. 2026-08-24 01:00 UTCGHSA enrichment
  37. 2026-08-23 02:19 UTCEG score recompute
  38. 2026-08-23 02:19 UTCVendor advisory
  39. 2026-08-23 02:19 UTCGHSA enrichment
  40. 2026-08-23 00:19 UTCEPSS rescore
  41. 2026-08-22 03:41 UTCEG score recompute
  42. 2026-08-22 03:41 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-08-22 03:41 UTCGHSA enrichment
  44. 2026-08-21 23:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  45. 2026-08-21 05:06 UTCEG score recompute
  46. 2026-08-21 05:06 UTCVendor advisory
  47. 2026-08-21 05:06 UTCGHSA enrichment
  48. 2026-08-20 22:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  49. 2026-08-20 06:31 UTCEG score recompute
  50. 2026-08-20 06:31 UTCVendor advisory
  51. 2026-08-20 06:31 UTCGHSA enrichment
  52. 2026-08-19 17:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  53. 2026-08-19 07:56 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-08-19 07:56 UTCVendor advisory
  55. 2026-08-19 07:56 UTCGHSA enrichment
  56. 2026-08-18 13:48 UTCEPSS rescore
  57. 2026-08-18 09:22 UTCEG score recompute
  58. 2026-08-18 09:22 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-08-18 09:22 UTCGHSA enrichment
  60. 2026-08-17 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  61. 2026-08-17 09:32 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-08-17 09:32 UTCVendor advisory
  63. 2026-08-17 09:32 UTCGHSA enrichment
  64. 2026-08-16 14:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  65. 2026-08-16 10:58 UTCEG score recompute
  66. 2026-08-16 10:58 UTCVendor advisory
  67. 2026-08-16 10:58 UTCGHSA enrichment
  68. 2026-08-15 12:25 UTCEG score recompute
  69. 2026-08-15 12:25 UTCVendor advisory
  70. 2026-08-15 12:25 UTCGHSA enrichment
  71. 2026-08-15 01:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  72. 2026-08-14 13:50 UTCEG score recompute
  73. 2026-08-14 13:50 UTCVendor advisory
  74. 2026-08-14 13:50 UTCGHSA enrichment
  75. 2026-08-13 22:00 UTCEPSS rescore

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-64130?
CVE-2026-64130 is a medium vulnerability published on July 19, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/pagealloc: fix initialization of tags of the huge zero folio with initon_free GFP_ZEROTAGS semantics are currently a bit weird, but effectively this flag is only ever set alongside GFPZERO and GFPSKIP_KASAN. If we run with…
When was CVE-2026-64130 disclosed?
CVE-2026-64130 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on July 19, 2026, with the most recent update on August 13, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-64130 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-64130 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the top 97.8% of all scored CVEs.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-64130?
CVE-2026-64130 has a CVSS v3 base score of 5.5 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-64130?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-64130, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-64130

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-64130?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.