CVE-2026-64460
Is CVE-2026-64460 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:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: PCI/IOV: Skip VF Resizable BAR restore on read error sriov_restore_vf_rebar_state() uses the VF Resizable BAR Control register to decide how many VF BARs to restore (nbars) and which VF BAR each iteration addresses (bar_idx). bar_idx indexes into dev->sriov->barsz[], which has only PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS (6) entries. When a device does not respond, config reads typically return PCI_ERROR_RESPONSE (~0). Both fields are 3 bits wide, so nbars and bar_idx both evaluate to 7. The barsz[] access then goes out of bounds. UBSAN reports this as: UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in drivers/pci/iov.c:948:51 index 7 is out of range for type 'resource_size_t [6]' Observed on an NVIDIA RTX PRO 1000 GPU (GB207GLM) that stopped responding during a failed GC6 power state exit. The subsequent pci_restore_state() invoked sriov_restore_vf_rebar_state() while config reads returned 0xffffffff, triggering the splat. Bail out if any VF Resizable BAR Control read returns PCI_ERROR_RESPONSE. No further VF BARs are touched, which is safe because a config read that returns PCI_ERROR_RESPONSE indicates the device is unreachable and restoration is pointless. This mirrors the guard in pci_restore_rebar_state().
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64460)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64460"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64460/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64460"></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 verdictsNo 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.
No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.