CVE-2026-89849

HIGHPre-NVD 8.88.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 8.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-09-16. A secondary CVSS source baseline 8.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-80449 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

8.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 8.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

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

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path

qla2x00_status_entry() filters out non-TYPE_SRB entries and the SRB_NVME_CMD, SRB_BIDI_CMD and SRB_TM_CMD types, then falls through to a SCSI fast path that assumes the command is an SRB_SCSI_CMD. The first thing on that path, qla_chk_edif_rx_sa_delete_pending(), and the subsequent handling both evaluate GET_CMD_SP(sp), i.e. sp->u.scmd.cmd.

The srb u union overlays the SCSI command pointer with other command layouts (bsg_job, iocb_cmd). If firmware delivers an unexpected STATUS_TYPE IOCB for a non-SCSI handle, sp->u.scmd.cmd can read as a non-NULL garbage pointer, bypassing the NULL checks in qla_chk_edif_rx_sa_delete_pending() and at the cp == NULL test, and leading to a wild pointer dereference.

Reject any SRB whose type is not SRB_SCSI_CMD before entering the fast path. The outstanding_cmds slot is left untouched so a genuinely non-SCSI command still completes through its proper handler.

CVSS v3
8.8
EG Score
8.8HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
40
EG Risk 40/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity88% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
30th
KEV
Not listed

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 (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-11). 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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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

Published

September 16, 2026

Last Modified

October 19, 2026

Advisory Details (7)

Auto-updated Sep 16, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0f41d07d72f2245208c45374ca8d0a1846cad667
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/29f1f9ad9e354cd0b6e4f6fc75ba09162d6a04d9
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e93aa3c5125d9a4352ac0fa8ba4a7f8f87881805
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e38041b47c29316ba79b645e2ae0b713d216b1db
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8f0e31e7a41376abe7d6ca7cbee07fcf9de071e6
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b7418198b45b327194b97f856fe8ea8daa91f3fd
Web page

scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9204fb0888374083be74f799049649a17eab4191

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-89849(2)

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

Patch Availability(16)

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

(4 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 6.1.99-1 (57 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.190-1: fixed in 6.1.190-1
—
linux-6.126.12.100-1~deb12u1, 6.12.101-1~deb12u1, 6.12.107-1~deb12u1
  • every version up to 6.12.111-1~deb12u1: fixed in 6.12.111-1~deb12u1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 6.12.96-1 (35 versions)
  • every version up to 6.12.111-1: fixed in 6.12.111-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (180 versions)
  • every version up to 7.2.6-1: fixed in 7.2.6-1
—

Additional Vendor Advisories

(16)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 40× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 204 rows on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 104 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-13 16:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  2. 2026-11-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  3. 2026-11-11 22:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  4. 2026-11-11 22:46 UTCVendor advisory
  5. 2026-11-11 22:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  6. 2026-11-11 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  7. 2026-11-10 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  8. 2026-11-09 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  9. 2026-11-08 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  10. 2026-11-07 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  11. 2026-11-06 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  12. 2026-11-05 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  13. 2026-11-04 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  14. 2026-11-04 08:44 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-04 08:44 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-11-04 08:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  17. 2026-11-03 16:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  18. 2026-11-02 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  19. 2026-11-01 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  20. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  21. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  22. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  23. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  24. 2026-10-27 18:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  25. 2026-10-27 18:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  2. 2026-10-26 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  3. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  4. 2026-10-25 13:52 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  6. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  7. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  8. 2026-10-21 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  9. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  10. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  11. 2026-10-19 09:37 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-10-19 09:37 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-10-19 09:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  14. 2026-10-19 09:14 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-10-19 09:14 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-10-19 09:14 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  17. 2026-10-18 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  18. 2026-10-18 03:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  19. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  20. 2026-10-16 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  21. 2026-10-16 12:38 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-10-16 12:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  23. 2026-10-15 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  24. 2026-10-14 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  25. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  26. 2026-10-13 04:52 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  27. 2026-10-13 04:52 UTCVendor advisory
  28. 2026-10-13 04:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  29. 2026-10-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  30. 2026-10-12 14:48 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  31. 2026-10-11 19:14 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  32. 2026-10-11 16:31 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  33. 2026-10-11 14:08 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  34. 2026-10-11 14:08 UTCVendor advisory
  35. 2026-10-11 14:08 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  36. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  37. 2026-10-11 13:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  38. 2026-10-10 23:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  39. 2026-10-10 23:47 UTCVendor advisory
  40. 2026-10-10 23:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  41. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  42. 2026-10-10 10:57 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-10-10 10:57 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  44. 2026-10-09 22:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  45. 2026-10-09 22:13 UTCVendor advisory
  46. 2026-10-09 22:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  47. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  48. 2026-10-09 09:28 UTCVendor advisory
  49. 2026-10-09 09:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  50. 2026-10-08 20:44 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  51. 2026-10-08 20:44 UTCVendor advisory
  52. 2026-10-08 20:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  53. 2026-10-08 17:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  54. 2026-10-08 00:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  55. 2026-10-08 00:59 UTCVendor advisory
  56. 2026-10-08 00:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  57. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  58. 2026-10-07 12:15 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-10-07 12:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  60. 2026-10-06 23:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  61. 2026-10-06 23:25 UTCVendor advisory
  62. 2026-10-06 23:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  63. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  64. 2026-10-06 10:42 UTCVendor advisory
  65. 2026-10-06 10:42 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  66. 2026-10-05 21:56 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  67. 2026-10-05 21:56 UTCVendor advisory
  68. 2026-10-05 21:56 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  69. 2026-10-05 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  70. 2026-10-05 09:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  71. 2026-10-05 09:13 UTCVendor advisory
  72. 2026-10-05 09:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8
  73. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  74. 2026-10-04 20:24 UTCVendor advisory
  75. 2026-10-04 20:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3v4r-7crj-gvc7 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.8

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-89849?
CVE-2026-89849 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 16, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Reject non-SCSI SRB on status IOCB fast path qla2x00_status_entry() filters out non-TYPE_SRB entries and the SRB_NVME_CMD, SRB_BIDI_CMD and SRB_TM_CMD types, then falls through to a SCSI fast path that assumes the…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-89849 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-89849 was published on September 16, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 19, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-89849 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-89849 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (30th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-89849?
CVE-2026-89849 has a CVSS base score of 8.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-89849?
A fix for CVE-2026-89849 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-89849 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-89849

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-89849?

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