CVE-2026-74580
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn 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.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataThere is no version to upgrade to and no patch to apply. Every affected install stays exposed until the vendor ships a fix — or somebody else builds one.
Free. We build fixes in the order the community asks for them — and we’ll tell you the moment this one lands.
We develop and verify an original fix where the vendor hasn’t, from $4,900. Deployed to your staging first — never straight to production.
Scope it with usSee what else the community needs solved on the solutions-needed board.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-74580 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-74580 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data