CVE-2026-19936 : Chi tiết

CVE-2026-19936

4.8
/
Trung bình
2026-10-13
00h17 +00:00
Adjacent
2026-11-04
05h18 +00:00
Thông báo cho một CVE
Luôn được thông báo về mọi thay đổi đối với một CVE cụ thể.
Quản lý thông báo

Mô tả CVE

The Bluetooth Mesh Access-layer delayable message queue in subsys/bluetooth/mesh/delayable_msg.c shares three intrusive lists (busy_ctx, free_ctx, free_chunks) and one k_work_delayable between two cooperative threads with no synchronization: bt_mesh_delayable_msg_manage() runs on the Bluetooth host RX thread, while delayable_msg_handler() runs on the system workqueue. Both block while the lists are in an intermediate state — the enqueuer in bt_rand(), both in bt_mesh_access_send() — which lets the other context observe torn state. delayable_msg_handler() used the result of sys_slist_get() on busy_ctx without a NULL check, and allocate_delayable_msg_ctx() tested sys_slist_is_empty() and then assumed a separate sys_slist_get() would succeed. Because CONFIG_BT_MESH_ACCESS_DELAYABLE_MSG and CONFIG_BT_MESH_ACCESS_DELAYABLE_MSG_CTX_ENABLED default to y, every model response to a received mesh message is parked on this queue, so the enqueuer runs as a direct consequence of inbound traffic. A peer that can get access-layer messages accepted by a model (it must hold the NetKey and a bound AppKey, so a legitimate or compromised network member) controls the arrival rate, the size of the elicited responses and the destination address, and thereby controls occupancy of the 4-entry context pool and the 40-entry chunk pool. Exhausting the chunk pool forces bt_mesh_delayable_msg_manage() down the purge path, which sends and releases the only queued message and leaves busy_ctx empty while the delayable work item is still armed; if the enqueuer then yields, the handler runs against the empty list. The result is a read-modify-write through a NULL-based pointer (pending_msg->fired_time += 10) at a fixed low address on the system workqueue thread. On typical targets that faults, aborting the system workqueue thread — which stops all workqueue-driven functionality, including the mesh timing machinery — or resetting the node, so the impact is loss of availability of the affected node. The write value and address are fixed and no attacker-controlled length or index is involved, so this is not exploitable for memory corruption or code execution. The same unsynchronized window also allowed one message context to be selected and released by two contexts at once, producing duplicated transmissions, duplicated send-completion callbacks and crossed chunk ownership. The fix serializes every list mutation with a k_spinlock that is never held across a blocking call, makes push_msg_from_delayable_msgs() detach the queue head atomically so a message being sent is on no list, removes the unchecked sys_slist_get() from delayable_msg_handler(), and drops any message that reaches the front of the queue while the stack is suspended or reset.

Thông tin CVE

Điểm yếu liên quan

CWE-ID Tên điểm yếu Nguồn
CWE-362 Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization
The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

Số liệu

Số liệu Điểm Mức độ nghiêm trọng CVSS Vector Nguồn
V3.1 4.8 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.

Adjacent

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).

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.

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.

None

There is no loss of integrity within 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

Tài liệu tham khảo