CVE-2026-19936

MEDIUMPre-NVD 4.84.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This medium-severity CVE scores 4.8 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.1% (3rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 3 sources updated this week
4.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.1%CVSS: 4.8Exploit: 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 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.

CVSS v3
4.8
EG Score
4.8MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
22
EG Risk 22/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity48% × 45%
The EG Score, 4.8 of 10.
Exploitation0.1% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
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.
Action: 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.
EPSS PROB
0.1%
EPSS %ILE
3rd
KEV
Not listed

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 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 (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.

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

Published

October 12, 2026

Last Modified

October 13, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 12, 2026
Fix referenced — no release confirmed yet. Sources: github_commit, github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

Bluetooth Mesh delayable message queue: unsynchronized list access leads to NULL pointer dereference · Advisory · zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr · GitHub

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/security/advisories/GHSA-4p55-7h77-fhgr
GitHub commit

commit 0a6da68955f4 (zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr)

Fix landed in zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr commit 0a6da68955f4 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/commit/0a6da68955f454edc41e4b916e05c3b974209fe4

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 5× in last 7d / 5× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-13 17:10 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-13 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  3. 2026-10-13 00:27 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-12 23:26 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 4.8 MEDIUM
  5. 2026-10-12 23:24 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-19936?
CVE-2026-19936 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 12, 2026. The Bluetooth Mesh Access-layer delayable message queue in subsys/bluetooth/mesh/delayablemsg.c shares three intrusive lists (busyctx, freectx, freechunks) and one kworkdelayable between two cooperative threads with no synchronization: btmeshdelayablemsgmanage() runs on the Bluetooth host RX…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-19936 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-19936 was published on October 12, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 13, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-19936 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-19936 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (3rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-19936?
CVE-2026-19936 has a CVSS base score of 4.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-19936?
A fix for CVE-2026-19936 is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but EchelonGraph has no release containing it on record. Check that reference and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains the fix and update to it; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-19936

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-19936?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.