In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
HID: core: fix OOB read of field->usage in hid_set_field()
hid_set_field() hands field->usage + offset to hid_dump_input() before
the guard that bounds offset:
hid_dump_input(field->report->device, field->usage + offset, value);
if (offset >= field->report_count) {
hid_err(...);
return -1;
}
Under CONFIG_DEBUG_FS hid_dump_input() dereferences that pointer, with
buf = hid_resolv_usage(usage->hid, NULL). The usage[] array is
allocated inline with the hid_field in hid_register_field() and holds
field->maxusage entries, so an offset past it reads off the end of the
kvzalloc()ed allocation and into a neighbouring object. Had the guard
run first, offset < report_count <= maxusage would already have confined
the pointer to the array.
A caller supplies such an offset today. picolcd_fb_send_tile()
validates only report->maxfield before issuing
hid_set_field(report->field[0], 11 + i, ...) for i = 0..31, so its
offsets are fixed at 11..42 and are never checked against the bound
field. When the device registers that field with fewer usages, the
framebuffer deferred-io work drives the read on every tile. KASAN
reports a 4-byte slab-out-of-bounds read in hid_dump_input() below
hid_set_field(), and the same boot logs "offset (1) exceeds
report_count (1)" from the guard that runs only afterwards.
Move the hid_dump_input() call below the guard. Because
field->maxusage >= field->report_count, the guard then establishes that
field->usage + offset lies inside the array before it is dereferenced,
for every caller and without changing behaviour on the valid path.
Discovered by XBOW, triaged by Baul Lee
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