In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
block: recompute nr_integrity_segments in blk_insert_cloned_request
blk_insert_cloned_request() already recomputes nr_phys_segments
against the bottom queue, because "the queue settings related to
segment counting may differ from the original queue." The exact same
reasoning applies to integrity segments: a stacked driver's underlying
queue can have tighter virt_boundary_mask, seg_boundary_mask, or
max_segment_size than the top queue, in which case
blk_rq_count_integrity_sg() against the bottom queue produces a
different count than the cached rq->nr_integrity_segments inherited
from the source request by blk_rq_prep_clone().
When the cached count is lower than the bottom queue's actual count,
blk_rq_map_integrity_sg() trips
BUG_ON(segments > rq->nr_integrity_segments);
on dispatch. The same families of stacked setups that motivated the
existing nr_phys_segments recompute -- dm-multipath fanning out to
nvme-rdma in particular -- can produce this.
Mirror the nr_phys_segments handling: when the request carries
integrity, recompute nr_integrity_segments against the bottom queue
and reject the request if it exceeds the bottom queue's
max_integrity_segments. blk_rq_count_integrity_sg() and
queue_max_integrity_segments() are both already available via
, which blk-mq.c includes.
This closes a latent gap in the stacking contract and brings the
integrity-segment accounting in line with the existing
phys-segment accounting.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.8 CRITICALCVSS-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 2026-11-12). 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: 3 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 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)3 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 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