In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
Input: cs40l50-vibra - validate custom data from user space
cs40l50_add() copies the custom data of an FF_PERIODIC/FF_CUSTOM effect
straight from the ff_effect the user passed to EVIOCSFF, without
requiring it to hold anything:
work_data.custom_data = memdup_array_user(periodic->custom_data,
periodic->custom_len,
sizeof(s16));
work_data.custom_len = periodic->custom_len;
The driver then reads two words out of that buffer: custom_data[0] as the
waveform bank in cs40l50_effect_bank_set(), and custom_data[1] as the
index within the bank in cs40l50_effect_index_set(). Neither read is
covered by a length check, and custom_len is fully user controlled:
- custom_len == 0 makes memdup_array_user() call memdup_user() with a
length of zero, which returns ZERO_SIZE_PTR rather than an error, so
custom_data[0] dereferences it.
- custom_len == 1 allocates two bytes. A bank of ROM or RAM keeps
effect->type out of the OWT case, and custom_data[1] is then read one
word past the allocation.
The bank value itself is also mishandled. It is masked with
CS40L50_CUSTOM_DATA_MASK (0xffff) but stored in an s16, so a
custom_data[0] of 0x8000 or above wraps to a negative value that passes
the "bank_type >= CS40L50_WVFRM_BANK_NUM" test.
cs40l50_effect_index_set() indexes vib->dsp.banks[] with it before the
switch statement's default case gets a chance to reject it:
base_index = vib->dsp.banks[effect->type].base_index;
max_index = vib->dsp.banks[effect->type].max_index;
Require the two words the driver reads to be present, and hold the masked
bank in a u32 so the existing upper-bound test covers the whole range.
The da7280 haptic driver already range checks custom_len this way.
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 2026-10-27). 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 (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