In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
scsi: libiscsi_tcp: Bound SCSI Response data segment to the connection buffer
iscsi_tcp_hdr_dissect() receives the data segment of several PDU types
into the fixed-size conn->data buffer, which is allocated for
ISCSI_DEF_MAX_RECV_SEG_LEN (8192) bytes. For the LOGIN_RSP, TEXT_RSP,
REJECT and ASYNC_EVENT opcodes the dissect path already rejects a PDU
whose DataSegmentLength exceeds that buffer.
The SCSI Command Response (ISCSI_OP_SCSI_CMD_RSP) path also copies its
data segment (sense/response data) into conn->data via
iscsi_tcp_data_recv_prep(), but it does so without the same check. The
only upstream bound on in.datalen is conn->max_recv_dlength, the
initiator's advertised MaxRecvDataSegmentLength, which is commonly
negotiated well above 8192 (open-iscsi defaults to 262144). A target
that returns a SCSI Response with a DataSegmentLength between 8193 and
max_recv_dlength therefore overflows the 8192-byte conn->data buffer.
Once the same bound applies, ISCSI_OP_SCSI_CMD_RSP is handled exactly
like those responses: bound the data segment, receive it into conn->data
when present, and otherwise complete the PDU with no data. Fold the
opcode into that case group rather than duplicating the check.
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