CVE-2026-19735 : Detail

CVE-2026-19735

4.8
/
Sedang
2026-10-11
18h16 +00:00
A02-Cryptographic Failures
Network
2026-11-04
05h18 +00:00
Notifikasi untuk CVE tertentu
Tetap terinformasi tentang perubahan untuk CVE tertentu.
Kelola notifikasi

Deskripsi CVE

The RFC 6528 initial-sequence-number implementation in subsys/net/ip/tcp.c derived every TCP ISN from SHA-256(unique_key || four-tuple) plus a uptime-derived offset, where unique_key is a 128-bit secret filled once by sys_csrand_get(). The return value of that call was discarded and the once guard was latched to true even when the call failed. Because sys_csrand_get() leaves the destination buffer untouched on failure (it deliberately propagates the entropy-driver error rather than filling the buffer), a single failed call left unique_key as its all-zero BSS content for the remainder of the boot, with no retry, no log message and no fallback. A failure of the cryptographic random source is required to reach the weak state — for example -ENODEV/-EIO from the entropy driver in subsys/random/random_entropy_device.c (the in-tree comment notes that the hardware RNG "might still be gathering entropy during early boot situations"), or psa_generate_random() failing in subsys/random/random_psa.c when PSA crypto is not initialised or is backed by a Bluetooth-HCI entropy device that is not yet up. The first TCP connection is what triggers key generation, so a remote peer that reaches a listening port immediately after boot, or that can provoke a reboot, has indirect influence over whether generation coincides with that window. tcp_init_isn() is called for every passive open in tcp_conn_new() and every active open in net_tcp_connect(), so the poisoned key governs all TCP connections for that boot. With an all-zero key the ISN becomes a public function of the connection four-tuple plus a device-wide time offset. An off-path attacker can compute the hash term offline for any four-tuple and recover the shared time offset from a single observed ISN, after which the ISN the device will pick for other four-tuples is predictable. That defeats exactly the protection RFC 6528 provides: blind TCP connection spoofing against peers that trust the source address, and blind data injection into or reset of connections whose four-tuple can be guessed. Devices whose entropy source never errors were never in the weak state. The fix moves key generation into a single guarded helper that latches only on success, logs the error otherwise, and makes tcp_init_isn() fall back to sys_rand32_get() — the behaviour already used when CONFIG_NET_TCP_ISN_RFC6528 is disabled — instead of hashing with a known-constant key.

Informasi CVE

Kelemahan Terkait

CWE-ID Nama Kelemahan Sumber
CWE-330 Use of Insufficiently Random Values
The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers.

Metrik

Metrik Skor Tingkat keparahan CVSS Vektor Sumber
V3.1 4.8 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

High

successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

Low

There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

Low

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org

Referensi