HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 89530 svcrdma reject inline replies that overflow the
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Critical · CVSS 9.8CVE-2026-89530

svcrdma: Reject inline replies that overflow the pull-up bufferCVE-2026-89530

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-89530 records a Critical severity (CVSS 9.8) vulnerability in svcrdma: Reject inline replies that overflow the pull-up buffer. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Sep 11, 2026Updated Oct 21, 2026Source checked Oct 27, 2026First seen by HOL Sep 11, 2026Material review Oct 21, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Critical · CVSS 9.8
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
3 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 9.8. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <fcd91b9957462d398792201c239dffaeff1cc8b2 || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <1949dd1576f7a8aa161b1330c6125df9d53046d5 || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <8ec60eb51fae37cd3d334ff26e4a7d6fb21ff7cf || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <0fbe20dfe74b783d255bf389a6ea77aa25dc7860 || 9b65b18f817d9ada2bf67351f24bdcce6789a0bb || d564356e1919d1178568c19af410cfc1a9076663 || >=4.19.22 <4.20 || >=4.20.9 <4.21fcd91b9957462d398792201c239dffaeff1cc8b2, 1949dd1576f7a8aa161b1330c6125df9d53046d5, 8ec60eb51fae37cd3d334ff26e4a7d6fb21ff7cf, 0fbe20dfe74b783d255bf389a6ea77aa25dc7860, 4.20, 4.21
Linux/Linuxgeneric5.0Not reported
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <8068358f445a11296328ffa7c524701596814a17 || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <fcd91b9957462d398792201c239dffaeff1cc8b2 || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <1949dd1576f7a8aa161b1330c6125df9d53046d5 || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <8ec60eb51fae37cd3d334ff26e4a7d6fb21ff7cf || >=e248aa7be86e8179f20ac0931774ecd746f3f5bf <0fbe20dfe74b783d255bf389a6ea77aa25dc7860 || 9b65b18f817d9ada2bf67351f24bdcce6789a0bb || d564356e1919d1178568c19af410cfc1a9076663 || >=4.19.22 <4.20 || >=4.20.9 <4.218068358f445a11296328ffa7c524701596814a17, fcd91b9957462d398792201c239dffaeff1cc8b2, 1949dd1576f7a8aa161b1330c6125df9d53046d5, 8ec60eb51fae37cd3d334ff26e4a7d6fb21ff7cf, 0fbe20dfe74b783d255bf389a6ea77aa25dc7860, 4.20, 4.21

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to fcd91b9957462d398792201c239dffaeff1cc8b2; Linux/Linux to 8068358f445a11296328ffa7c524701596814a17 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Sep 11, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Oct 21, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Sep 11, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
Upstream source description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: svcrdma: Reject inline replies that overflow the pull-up buffer An RPC-over-RDMA client can request a reply, such as an NFS READ payload, without providing a Write list or a Reply chunk to carry it. When such a reply needs more scatter/gather entries than the device's Send Queue supports, svc_rdma_pull_up_needed() selects pull-up and svc_rdma_pull_up_reply_msg() linearizes the whole reply into sctxt->sc_xprt_buf. That buffer is only sc_max_req_size bytes, while the reply on this path is bounded only by the client's request, so svc_rdma_xb_linearize() copies past the end of the buffer and corrupts adjacent slab memory. The oversized length is then stored in sc_sges[0].length and posted, so the device also reads beyond the mapped region. The SGE-exhaustion branch is the only pull-up path that can exceed the buffer: the threshold branch pulls up only replies smaller than RPCRDMA_PULLUP_THRESH, and replies that fit the device's SGE budget are sent directly without linearization. Make svc_rdma_pull_up_needed() report -E2BIG when the reply it would pull up cannot fit sc_max_req_size, and fail the request with ERR_CHUNK as RFC 8166 Section 4.5.3 directs rather than dropping the connection. The helper no longer answers a simple yes/no question: it now reports pull-up, no pull-up, or -E2BIG for a reply too large to linearize. Rename svc_rdma_pull_up_needed() to svc_rdma_check_pull_up() so its name no longer implies a boolean predicate.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Vulnerability
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 27, 2026
References
5 linked sources
Open source record