EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
- •High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 7.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed
A fix is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but no release containing it is confirmed — find the release that contains it; until it is applied, mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation).
The userspace verifier z_vrfy_log_filter_set() for the log_filter_set syscall in subsys/logging/log_mgmt.c performed a signed comparison against the int16_t src_id parameter: src_id < (int16_t)log_src_cnt_get(domain_id). Any negative value for src_id (e.g. -1) trivially satisfied this check and was forwarded into z_impl_log_filter_set, where it propagated to filter_set() and ultimately to get_dynamic_filter(), which uses source_id as an unsigned index into the linker-section array &TYPE_SECTION_START(log_dynamic)[source_id].filters.
After implicit conversion through uint32_t, an int16_t -1 becomes 0xFFFFFFFF, indexing log_dynamic far out of bounds and causing the kernel to perform an OOB read and an OOB read-modify-write (LOG_FILTER_SLOT_GET/SET) against memory adjacent to the log_dynamic section.
The written value is a constrained 3-bit log level slot within the targeted 32-bit word, but the target address is attacker-chosen (a small negative offset from log_dynamic) and the write occurs in supervisor mode following a syscall from an unprivileged user thread, providing a kernel memory-corruption / privilege-escalation primitive.
The defect is reachable on any build with CONFIG_USERSPACE=y and CONFIG_LOG_RUNTIME_FILTERING=y. Present from Zephyr v3.3.0 through v4.4.1. The fix replaces the signed bound check with an unsigned comparison: (uint32_t)src_id < log_src_cnt_get(domain_id), which correctly rejects negative inputs.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it and apply that within your standard update timelines; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it