CVE-2026-23425
Is CVE-2026-23425 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.
baseline read
auto · not a community verdict
Real, but low real-world risk
A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.
Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS
Confirm or dispute →CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: arm64: Fix ID register initialization for non-protected pKVM guests In protected mode, the hypervisor maintains a separate instance of the `kvm` structure for each VM. For non-protected VMs, this structure is initialized from the host's `kvm` state. Currently, `pkvm_init_features_from_host()` copies the `KVM_ARCH_FLAG_ID_REGS_INITIALIZED` flag from the host without the underlying `id_regs` data being initialized. This results in the hypervisor seeing the flag as set while the ID registers remain zeroed. Consequently, `kvm_has_feat()` checks at EL2 fail (return 0) for non-protected VMs. This breaks logic that relies on feature detection, such as `ctxt_has_tcrx()` for TCR2_EL1 support. As a result, certain system registers (e.g., TCR2_EL1, PIR_EL1, POR_EL1) are not saved/restored during the world switch, which could lead to state corruption. Fix this by explicitly copying the ID registers from the host `kvm` to the hypervisor `kvm` for non-protected VMs during initialization, since we trust the host with its non-protected guests' features. Also ensure `KVM_ARCH_FLAG_ID_REGS_INITIALIZED` is cleared initially in `pkvm_init_features_from_host` so that `vm_copy_id_regs` can properly initialize them and set the flag once done.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-23425)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-23425"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-23425/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-23425"></a>Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.
Community ground truth
Be the first practitioner to weigh in
So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.
🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.
In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?
awaiting field verdictsCurated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.
No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.
Field notes & remediation
Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.
- 0
This scores high on paper (CVSS 8.8) but the real-world signal is low. It is not in CISA KEV and no public exploit was found, and near-term exploitation looks unlikely (EPSS about 0%). Verify your own exposure before treating it as urgent. It needs local access, so it reads more as a privilege-escalation or post-access risk than a remote one. Not an emergency for most teams, but patch it in your normal cycle and check whether the affected component is actually exposed in your setup.