CVE-2026-46325
Is CVE-2026-46325 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:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rxe: Fix iova-to-va conversion for MR page sizes != PAGE_SIZE The current implementation incorrectly handles memory regions (MRs) with page sizes different from the system PAGE_SIZE. The core issue is that rxe_set_page() is called with mr->page_size step increments, but the page_list stores individual struct page pointers, each representing PAGE_SIZE of memory. ib_sg_to_page() has ensured that when i>=1 either a) SG[i-1].dma_end and SG[i].dma_addr are contiguous or b) SG[i-1].dma_end and SG[i].dma_addr are mr->page_size aligned. This leads to incorrect iova-to-va conversion in scenarios: 1) page_size < PAGE_SIZE (e.g., MR: 4K, system: 64K): ibmr->iova = 0x181800 sg[0]: dma_addr=0x181800, len=0x800 sg[1]: dma_addr=0x173000, len=0x1000 Access iova = 0x181800 + 0x810 = 0x182010 Expected VA: 0x173010 (second SG, offset 0x10) Before fix: - index = (0x182010 >> 12) - (0x181800 >> 12) = 1 - page_offset = 0x182010 & 0xFFF = 0x10 - xarray[1] stores system page base 0x170000 - Resulting VA: 0x170000 + 0x10 = 0x170010 (wrong) 2) page_size > PAGE_SIZE (e.g., MR: 64K, system: 4K): ibmr->iova = 0x18f800 sg[0]: dma_addr=0x18f800, len=0x800 sg[1]: dma_addr=0x170000, len=0x1000 Access iova = 0x18f800 + 0x810 = 0x190010 Expected VA: 0x170010 (second SG, offset 0x10) Before fix: - index = (0x190010 >> 16) - (0x18f800 >> 16) = 1 - page_offset = 0x190010 & 0xFFFF = 0x10 - xarray[1] stores system page for dma_addr 0x170000 - Resulting VA: system page of 0x170000 + 0x10 = 0x170010 (wrong) Yi Zhang reported a kernel panic[1] years ago related to this defect. Solution: 1. Replace xarray with pre-allocated rxe_mr_page array for sequential indexing (all MR page indices are contiguous) 2. Each rxe_mr_page stores both struct page* and offset within the system page 3. Handle MR page_size != PAGE_SIZE relationships: - page_size > PAGE_SIZE: Split MR pages into multiple system pages - page_size <= PAGE_SIZE: Store offset within system page 4. Add boundary checks and compatibility validation This ensures correct iova-to-va conversion regardless of MR page size and system PAGE_SIZE relationship, while improving performance through array-based sequential access. Tests on 4K and 64K PAGE_SIZE hosts: - rdma-core/pytests $ ./build/bin/run_tests.py --dev eth0_rxe - blktest: $ TIMEOUT=30 QUICK_RUN=1 USE_RXE=1 NVMET_TRTYPES=rdma ./check nvme srp rnbd [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHj4cs9XRqE25jyVw9rj9YugffLn5+f=1znaBEnu1usLOciD+g@mail.gmail.com/T/
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46325)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46325"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46325/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46325"></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 9.8) 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 is reachable over the network with no authentication and no user interaction, which is the most dangerous profile. 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.