CVE-2026-72335

HIGHPre-NVD 7.87.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 7.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-08-15. A secondary CVSS source baseline 7.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
7.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate 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 available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup

hci_add_adv_monitor() publishes a new adv_monitor in hdev->adv_monitors_idr before the powered MSFT setup step. The MSFT offload add path can then fail either locally before the controller add command completes, or in the MSFT add callback. In the current queued management add flow, hci_cmd_sync_work() still invokes mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete() with the original pending command after msft_add_monitor_pattern() returns.

The buggy scenario involves two paths, with each column showing the order within that path:

MSFT add handling MGMT completion

  • insert monitor and handle 1. receive sync error
  • send MSFT add command 2. call add-monitor completion
  • callback sees bad response 3. load cmd->user_data
  • callback frees monitor 4. read monitor->handle

Local MSFT setup failures have the other half of the same ownership bug: they return an error after the IDR insertion, but no later code removes the failed monitor from the IDR.

Keep ownership with the pending management command until its completion. For normal management adds, the MSFT add callback now records successful controller state and returns errors to its caller. The management completion frees the monitor on non-success after copying the response handle, while resume/reregister callback-error cleanup remains in the MSFT callback. The success path keeps the existing bookkeeping.

Validation reproduced this kernel report: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0xfb/0x260 [bluetooth]

Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x66/0xa0 print_report+0xce/0x5f0 ? mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0xfb/0x260 [bluetooth] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? __virt_addr_valid+0x19f/0x330 ? mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0xfb/0x260 [bluetooth] kasan_report+0xe0/0x110 ? mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0xfb/0x260 [bluetooth] mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0xfb/0x260 [bluetooth] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? 0xffffffffc00d00da ? __pfx_mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0x10/0x10 [bluetooth] ? __pfx_mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0x10/0x10 [bluetooth] ? hci_cmd_sync_work+0x1ab/0x210 [bluetooth] hci_cmd_sync_work+0x1c0/0x210 [bluetooth] ? __pfx_mgmt_add_adv_patterns_monitor_complete+0x10/0x10 [bluetooth] process_one_work+0x4fd/0xbc0 ? __pfx_process_one_work+0x10/0x10 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? __list_add_valid_or_report+0x37/0xf0 ? __pfx_hci_cmd_sync_work+0x10/0x10 [bluetooth] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 worker_thread+0x2d8/0x570 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x1ad/0x1f0 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x3c9/0x540 ? __pfx_ret_from_fork+0x10/0x10 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? __switch_to+0x2e9/0x730 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30

Allocated by task 471 on cpu 3 at 285.205389s: kasan_save_stack+0x33/0x60 kasan_save_track+0x17/0x60 __kasan_kmalloc+0xaa/0xb0 add_adv_patterns_monitor_rssi+0xd5/0x230 [bluetooth] hci_sock_sendmsg+0x96b/0xf80 [bluetooth] __sys_sendto+0x2bc/0x2d0 __x64_sys_sendto+0x76/0x90 do_syscall_64+0x115/0x6a0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

Freed by task 454 on cpu 2 at 285.217112s: kasan_save_stack+0x33/0x60 kasan_save_track+0x17/0x60 kasan_save_free_info+0x3b/0x60 __kasan_slab_free+0x5f/0x80 kfree+0x313/0x590 msft_add_monitor_sync+0x54a/0x570 [bluetooth] hci_add_adv_monitor+0x133/0x180 [bluetooth] hci_cmd_sync_work+0x187/0x210 [bluetooth] process_one_work+0x4fd/0xbc0 worker_thread+0x2d8/0x570 kthread+0x1ad/0x1f0 ret_from_fork+0x3c9/0x540 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30

CVSS v3
7.8
EG Score
7.8HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
35
EG Risk 35/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity78% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
6th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-17). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
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.Each input and its source: 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 available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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)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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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

Published

August 15, 2026

Last Modified

October 16, 2026

Advisory Details (6)

Auto-updated Aug 17, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fb256d07395ebbc950f42e439d3896ec3a25c845
Web page

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dfc8373893b1876bb367700eac9d776316dabd96
Web page

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dbd935a9e056545721bc4e9ce518c775d787b21e
Web page

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b1a719b3c4359ef731646fb7c7844e53dddbda72
Web page

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5aabbd01ac315a72bcdfd42985ede712c4744689
Web page

Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/384a4b2fef9ffe5e270ee5558975c0504881c5fb

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-72335(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(9)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-fde-edge (7.0.0-1016.16~24.04.1) @ noble2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-hwe-24.04-edge (7.0.0-38.38~24.04.4) @ noble2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-6.8 (6.8.0-147.147) @ noble2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-lts-26.04 (7.0.0-1017.17) @ resolute2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oem-7.0 (7.0.0-1015.15) @ resolute2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-hwe-26.04-edge (7.0.0-38.38) @ resolute2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-nvidia-tegra-rt-6.8 (6.8.0-1036.39) @ noble2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-aws-edge (7.0.0-1014.14~24.04.1) @ noble2026-10-16ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-lts-24.04 (6.8.0-1071.79) @ noble2026-10-16ubuntu

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 6.1.99-1 (55 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.180-1: fixed in 6.1.180-1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.38-1 ... 6.12.96-1 (31 versions)
  • every version up to 6.12.100-1: fixed in 6.12.100-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.1~rc7-1~exp1 (160 versions)
  • every version up to 7.1.5-1: fixed in 7.1.5-1
—

All Vendor Advisories

(9)

Every vendor that published an advisory referencing this CVE — pulled from our cve_vendor_advisories aggregation. Click any row for the vendor's original advisory page.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 12× in last 7d / 77× 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.

Showing the most recent 100 of 218 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 118 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  2. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  3. 2026-10-18 03:16 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-16 19:41 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-16 19:41 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-16 19:41 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  7. 2026-10-16 19:02 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-16 19:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  9. 2026-10-16 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  10. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  11. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  12. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  13. 2026-10-13 08:15 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-13 08:15 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-10-13 08:14 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  16. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  17. 2026-10-12 15:42 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-11 19:27 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-11 16:43 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-11 14:03 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  22. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  23. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  24. 2026-10-08 17:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  25. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-06 22:39 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-06 22:39 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-10-06 22:39 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  4. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  5. 2026-10-06 09:15 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-06 09:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  7. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  8. 2026-10-05 12:34 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-05 12:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  10. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  11. 2026-10-04 22:03 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  12. 2026-10-04 07:06 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  13. 2026-10-03 19:35 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-03 19:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  15. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  16. 2026-10-02 18:56 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-02 18:56 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  18. 2026-10-02 07:11 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-02 07:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  20. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  21. 2026-10-01 08:42 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  22. 2026-09-30 21:09 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-09-30 21:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  24. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  25. 2026-09-29 00:11 UTCEG score recompute
  26. 2026-09-29 00:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  27. 2026-09-28 13:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  28. 2026-09-28 10:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  29. 2026-09-27 23:02 UTCEG score recompute
  30. 2026-09-27 23:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  31. 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  32. 2026-09-27 08:40 UTCEG score recompute
  33. 2026-09-27 08:40 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  34. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 5th percentile
  35. 2026-09-25 02:43 UTCEG score recompute
  36. 2026-09-25 02:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  37. 2026-09-24 08:08 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  38. 2026-09-23 20:36 UTCEG score recompute
  39. 2026-09-23 20:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  40. 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  41. 2026-09-23 08:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  42. 2026-09-22 21:22 UTCEG score recompute
  43. 2026-09-22 21:22 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  44. 2026-09-22 09:51 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  45. 2026-09-21 21:21 UTCEG score recompute
  46. 2026-09-21 21:21 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  47. 2026-09-21 21:09 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  48. 2026-09-21 09:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  49. 2026-09-20 22:18 UTCEG score recompute
  50. 2026-09-20 22:18 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  51. 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  52. 2026-09-20 10:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  53. 2026-09-19 23:01 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-09-19 23:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  55. 2026-09-19 11:07 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  56. 2026-09-18 23:28 UTCEG score recompute
  57. 2026-09-18 23:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  58. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  59. 2026-09-18 11:56 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  60. 2026-09-18 00:22 UTCEG score recompute
  61. 2026-09-18 00:22 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  62. 2026-09-17 11:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  63. 2026-09-17 00:05 UTCEG score recompute
  64. 2026-09-17 00:05 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  65. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  66. 2026-09-16 12:32 UTCEG score recompute
  67. 2026-09-16 12:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  68. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  69. 2026-09-16 01:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  70. 2026-09-15 13:02 UTCEG score recompute
  71. 2026-09-15 13:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  72. 2026-09-15 03:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  73. 2026-09-15 00:58 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  74. 2026-09-14 13:26 UTCEG score recompute
  75. 2026-09-14 13:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3hg2-6vgw-gv3f · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8

Related CVEs(same vendor)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-72335?
CVE-2026-72335 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on August 15, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Bluetooth: MGMT: Fix adv monitor add failure cleanup hciaddadvmonitor() publishes a new advmonitor in hdev->advmonitorsidr before the powered MSFT setup step. The MSFT offload add path can then fail either locally before the…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-72335 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-72335 was published on August 15, 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 16, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-72335 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-72335 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (6th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-72335?
CVE-2026-72335 has a CVSS base score of 7.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-72335?
A fix for CVE-2026-72335 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-72335 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-72335

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-72335?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs