CVE-2026-17052 : 詳細

CVE-2026-17052

7.8
/
高
2026-09-21
19h17 +00:00
Overflow
Local
2026-11-04
05h18 +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

The Time-aware GPIO syscall verification handler z_vrfy_tgpio_pin_read_ts_ec() in drivers/timeaware_gpio/timeaware_gpio_handlers.c validated only the port device object and passed the caller-supplied timestamp and event_count output pointers to the driver without a K_SYSCALL_MEMORY_WRITE() check. The other handlers in the same file (z_vrfy_tgpio_port_get_time(), z_vrfy_tgpio_port_get_cycles_per_second()) already performed that check, so the omission left one syscall unguarded. tgpio_pin_read_ts_ec() is declared __syscall, so with CONFIG_USERSPACE=y an unprivileged user-mode thread that has been granted access to the TGPIO device object can invoke it with arbitrary pointer values. tgpio_intel_read_ts_ec() in drivers/timeaware_gpio/timeaware_gpio_intel.c bounds-checks only the pin index and then unconditionally performs timestamp = ... and event_count = ..., executing two 8-byte stores in supervisor mode at addresses chosen by the user-mode caller. The result is a write-what-where primitive that crosses the userspace/kernel boundary: the target address is fully attacker-chosen and the stored values are the hardware time-capture and event-counter register contents. Corrupting kernel data structures this way can escalate the calling thread to supervisor privilege or crash the system; the device-object permission required is a narrow capability that is not intended to confer any kernel-memory access. The fix adds the two missing K_SYSCALL_MEMORY_WRITE() validations before the driver call. Exposure is narrow in practice. Only builds with CONFIG_USERSPACE=y and CONFIG_TIMEAWARE_GPIO=y compile the affected file, and from v3.6.0 onward the file additionally referenced a relocated header () and removed Z_SYSCALL_* macros, so such a configuration failed to build until those were repaired after v4.4.0. Downstream trees that locally corrected that breakage, and v3.5.0 builds where it did not exist, are the exposed population.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE-787 Out-of-bounds Write
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

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 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

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

参考資料