CVE-2026-10671 : 詳細

CVE-2026-10671

7.1
/
高
2026-07-14
15h16 +00:00
Overflow
Local
2026-10-24
21h10 +00:00
特定のCVEの通知
特定のCVEの変更情報をいち早くお届けします。
通知を管理する

CVE の説明

In Zephyr's kernel pipe implementation, the userspace syscall verifier z_vrfy_k_pipe_init() in kernel/pipe.c used K_SYSCALL_OBJ() (which requires the kernel object to already be initialized) instead of K_SYSCALL_OBJ_NEVER_INIT() (which rejects an already-initialized object). As a result, on CONFIG_USERSPACE builds an unprivileged user thread that has been granted access to a k_pipe object can invoke the k_pipe_init syscall to re-initialize a pipe that is already in use. z_impl_k_pipe_init() unconditionally resets the ring buffer, sets pipe->waiting to 0, and re-initializes both wait queues (z_waitq_init on pipe->data and pipe->space) without waking or accounting for threads currently blocked on the pipe. Any thread already pended in k_pipe_read()/k_pipe_write() is left orphaned: still marked pending with pended_on pointing at the cleared wait queue and with stale qnode_dlist links into the (now re-initialized) embedded list head. When such an orphaned waiter is later timed out or woken, the scheduler calls sys_dlist_remove() on its stale node, writing through dangling prev/next pointers into kernel wait-queue/scheduler structures, causing list corruption (an attacker-driven invalid kernel write), lost wakeups, indefinitely blocked threads, and silent data loss. The flaw lets a deprivileged user thread corrupt the state of a kernel object shared with other threads/partitions. The fix switches the verifier to K_SYSCALL_OBJ_NEVER_INIT(), matching the existing k_msgq_init verifier, so a user thread can no longer re-initialize a live pipe. The vulnerable code shipped in v4.1.0 and remained through v4.4.0.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE-825 Expired Pointer Dereference
The product dereferences a pointer that contains a location for memory that was previously valid, but is no longer valid.
CWE-1188 Initialization of a Resource with an Insecure Default
The product initializes or sets a resource with a default that is intended to be changed by the product's installer, administrator, or maintainer, but the default is not secure.

メトリクス

メトリクス スコア 深刻度 CVSS ベクター 出典
V3.1 7.1 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H

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.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

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

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

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

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

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.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within 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.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

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

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

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

関連製品

構成 0

Zephyrproject>>Zephyr >> Version ~から(含む) 4.1.0 ~まで(含まない) 4.5.0

参考資料