FKIE_CVE-2026-127915
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-11-13 02:18 - Updated: 2026-11-13 02:18| Vendor | Product | Version |
|---|
{
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"collectionURL": "https://github.com/mcu-tools/mcuboot",
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"packageName": "mcuboot",
"product": "mcuboot",
"programFiles": [
"boot/bootutil/src/image_validate.c",
"boot/bootutil/src/tlv.c"
],
"programRoutines": [
{
"name": "bootutil_img_validate"
},
{
"name": "bootutil_tlv_iter_next"
}
],
"vendor": "mcu-tools",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "2.5.0",
"status": "affected",
"version": "0.9.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"source": "vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "The MCUboot TLV iterator bootutil_tlv_iter_next() in boot/bootutil/src/tlv.c walks image trailer TLVs with a single loop guard (it-\u003etlv_off \u003c it-\u003etlv_end) and advances by sizeof(struct image_tlv) + tlv.it_len using the attacker-controlled it_len field, without validating that the entry\u0027s header or payload stays within it-\u003etlv_end. As a result the 4-byte header read can extend up to 3 bytes past the declared TLV area, and the returned (off, len) can describe a payload that runs past it.\n\nThe path is pre-authentication: TLVs are parsed during bootutil_img_validate() before the signature is verified, and a crafted image can be presented through DFU / serial-recovery / OTA. However the impact is contained by surrounding guards: bootutil_img_validate() first rejects a TLV area larger than bootutil_max_image_size(), the default LOAD_IMAGE_DATA sink is flash_area_read() which bounds-checks against the flash partition and fails an out-of-partition read, and every payload consumer (EXPECTED_HASH_TLV, EXPECTED_KEY_TLV, EXPECTED_SIG_TLV, IMAGE_TLV_SEC_CNT) clamps len against a fixed buffer before copying.\n\nThe residual effect in a default flash build is therefore an out-of-region read confined to the attacker\u0027s own slot partition whose result is never observable, yielding at worst a clean validation failure rather than memory corruption or information disclosure. A genuine (though still bounded) out-of-bounds read remains under the non-default MCUBOOT_RAM_LOAD configuration, where LOAD_IMAGE_DATA is an unchecked memcpy. The fix is to validate each entry\u0027s header and payload against it-\u003etlv_end inside the iterator."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-127915",
"lastModified": "2026-11-13T02:18:55.863",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "PHYSICAL",
"availabilityImpact": "LOW",
"baseScore": 2.0,
"baseSeverity": "LOW",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 0.5,
"impactScore": 1.4,
"source": "vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2026-11-13T02:18:55.863",
"references": [
{
"source": "vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org",
"url": "https://github.com/mcu-tools/mcuboot/commit/90f4e7c3ebe4cf9a5eb7d981220388ffdefd6d19"
},
{
"source": "vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org",
"url": "https://github.com/mcu-tools/mcuboot/security/advisories/GHSA-4fp3-3qw2-25jv"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org",
"vulnStatus": "Received",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-125"
}
],
"source": "vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.