Skip to main content

CVE-2026-98474

Microsoft — s390/pci: Fix missing device lock in zpci_report_status()

Microsoft · Not classified by connected sources

Patch Tuesday
0

EVRS 0 of 100 Informational

Monitor

Rank 2,919 of 2,960 tracked

Download PDF

Why it scores 0

Evidence available: 2 of 8 signals

No strong exploitation, disclosure, or severity signal is available for this CVE yet.

  • CISA KEVDid not apply
  • RansomwareNo data
  • Vendor exploitationNo data
  • EPSSDid not apply
  • Microsoft Exploitability IndexNo data
  • Pre-patch disclosureNo data
  • KEV recencyNo data
  • CVSSNo data

The band answers “how soon”, not “how bad”. No data for: Ransomware, Vendor exploitation, Microsoft Exploitability Index, Pre-patch disclosure, KEV recency, CVSS. Why some signals show no data

Fix

No fixed version identified yet

Affected versions

Not identified by the connected sources

Remediation

NVD lists one or more references for this CVE that aren't tagged as a patch or vendor advisory. Review them directly to confirm patch availability and applicability before making a remediation decision.

Evidence

Each value with its source
MeasureValueSource
CVSS base scoreHow severe the flaw is in itself. It does not say how likely an attack is. Not publishedNVD and the CVE record were checked and hold no score. NVD
FIRST EPSSFIRST's estimate of the chance this is exploited in the next 30 days, and how that ranks against all CVEs. 0.002 (5.5th pctl) FIRST EPSS
Actively exploitedWhether a source of record has confirmed attacks using it in the wild. Not confirmed Patch Tuesday
Public exploit moduleA module existing is not the same as active exploitation. None known Metasploit
EUVD cross-referenceENISA's record: CVSS 0.0, assigned by Linux. Listed ENISA EUVD

Description

NVD

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: s390/pci: Fix missing device lock in zpci_report_status() When pdev is non-NULL, zpci_report_status() accesses the device's driver. To get a consistent state matching the recovery, the device lock needs to be held. Do so by expanding the existing device lock critical section. The lock only needs to be held when the pdev is non-NULL, so extract the pdev-specific reporting into a helper function which also adds a lockdep assertion to detect calls without the device lock held.