EchelonGraph verdictMonitorNo release containing the referenced fix is confirmed: check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule (the SSVC decision on this page).
- •Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 5.1Exploit: 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).
MCUboot's Zephyr serial-recovery upload handler bs_upload() in boot/boot_serial/src/boot_serial.c decodes the host-supplied image field of an MCUmgr image-upload request into img_num (a full 32-bit value) and latches it on the off == 0 packet without any range check. It then passes img_num straight to flash_area_id_from_multi_image_slot(img_num, 0), which on the Zephyr port resolves to __flash_area_ids_for_slot() in boot/zephyr/include/sysflash/sysflash.h and indexes the static const int all_slots[] table as all_slots[img_num 2]. That table holds only MCUBOOT_IMAGE_NUMBER 2 entries, so any img_num >= MCUBOOT_IMAGE_NUMBER is an out-of-bounds read.
The path is reachable by anyone with access to the serial / SMP recovery console, which is unauthenticated by design, and the bad value is supplied before any image signature is verified. The defect is specific to the default non-direct upload path (MCUBOOT_SERIAL_DIRECT_IMAGE_UPLOAD disabled) on the Zephyr port with the array-backed slot layout (not CONFIG_SINGLE_APPLICATION_SLOT). It is not gated on a multi-image configuration: MCUBOOT_IMAGE_NUMBER defaults to 1, so even a default single-image build is affected for any image >= 1. The MCUBOOT_SERIAL_DIRECT_IMAGE_UPLOAD path is safe (its flash_area_id_from_direct_image() switch returns -EINVAL for unknown indices).
flash_area_id_from_multi_image_slot() takes a signed int image_index while img_num is uint32_t, so the attacker controls the sign of the index as well as its magnitude: an image of 0xFFFFFFFF converts to -1 and reads all_slots[-2], off the front of the table, while large positive values read off the end (CWE-192). Either way the index multiply img * 2 is performed in int, so a wild offset yields a bus/hard fault, giving a reliable denial of service of the bootloader during recovery. For moderately out-of-range indices the read returns adjacent .rodata as a garbage flash-area id that is handed to flash_area_open(); this normally fails with MGMT_ERR_EINVAL, but if the garbage id happens to match a valid non-image partition, the subsequent erase/write can target a partition outside the image set (CWE-787). The attacker-supplied value is never echoed back, so there is no information disclosure. The fix is to reject img_num >= BOOT_IMAGE_NUMBER on the off == 0 packet, before the slot lookup. The comparison must be made on the unsigned img_num: an equivalent guard applied after the conversion to int would not reject the negative case above. __flash_area_ids_for_slot() should bounds-check its own arguments as defence in depth.
This vulnerability was reported independently twice: by NVIDIA Project Vanessa on 2026-06-22, and by Kai Phan (@kaimandalic) on 2026-07-19 as GHSA-8v33-88p6-jffj, which is closed as a duplicate of this advisory. Both original reports are reproduced in full below.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.1 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
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; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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