In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
Bluetooth: ISO: zero the sockaddr before returning it in getname
iso_sock_getname() fills a struct sockaddr_iso in place and returns its
size without clearing it first, so bytes it does not write are copied to
user space from the kernel stack. The getsockname(2) and getpeername(2)
paths both run through do_getsockname(), which hands getname() an
uninitialized sockaddr_storage on the stack and copies back up to the
number of bytes getname() returns, so the driver has to initialize every
byte it accounts for.
Two ranges are left uninitialized:
- struct sockaddr_iso is 10 bytes but only 9 are written (family,
iso_bdaddr, iso_bdaddr_type), leaking the trailing pad byte on every
call.
- for a broadcast peer (BIS_LINK or PA_LINK) the returned length grows
by sizeof(struct sockaddr_iso_bc), but only bc_sid, bc_num_bis and
bc_bis are filled; bc_bdaddr and bc_bdaddr_type, the first 7 bytes of
that structure, are never written.
An unprivileged process can open a BTPROTO_ISO socket and reach the pad
leak with getsockname(); the broadcast leak needs an established BIS/PA
connection. l2cap and rfcomm already memset their sockaddr in getname
for the same reason; do the same here.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA 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 BOD 26-04 block below.
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