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: —CVSS: 6.5Exploit: 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 Classic Hands-Free Profile Audio Gateway implementation in subsys/bluetooth/host/classic/hfp_ag.c keeps its struct bt_hfp_ag objects in a static pool indexed by ACL connection index. On link teardown, hfp_ag_disconnected() cancels ag->tx_work and the per-call work items and then clears ag->acl_conn, which marks the pool slot as free — but it leaves ag->ongoing_call_work (and ag->slc_work) untouched. The next connection that lands on the same slot enters hfp_ag_create(), whose only occupancy test is ag->acl_conn, and immediately executes memset(ag, 0, sizeof(struct bt_hfp_ag)) followed by k_work_init_delayable(). Zeroing and re-initialising a k_work_delayable whose struct _timeout node is still linked into the kernel timeout list leaves the kernel holding a reference to a node with NULL prev/next links.
ag->ongoing_call_work is armed by the remote peer: when a Hands-Free unit sends AT+CIND? during Service Level Connection establishment and the application provides the asynchronous get_ongoing_call callback, the AG schedules the work for CONFIG_BT_HFP_AG_GET_ONGOING_CALL_TIMEOUT milliseconds (default 10000). The timer is cancelled only if the application answers in time via bt_hfp_ag_ongoing_calls(). A peer that sends AT+CIND?, then disconnects the HFP RFCOMM DLC, then immediately re-opens it on the same ACL link, reuses the same pool slot deterministically while the timeout is still pending — the AG's RFCOMM server accept path (hfp_ag_accept()) calls hfp_ag_create() directly, so the remote side drives both teardown and re-creation.
The result is corruption of the kernel's timeout list: sys_dlist_remove() on the zeroed node performs writes through NULL pointers from the clock-announce path, and rescheduling the re-initialised work re-inserts a node the list already references, creating a cycle that the announce loop walks with interrupts locked. The observable impact is a fault or hang of the whole system, i.e. a denial of service reachable from Bluetooth radio range; no attacker-controlled data is written, so this does not by itself yield code execution. Exposure is limited to builds with CONFIG_BT_HFP_AG (marked experimental and disabled by default) whose application implements the asynchronous get_ongoing_call callback.
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