CVE-2026-90251

UNRATEDCVSS · not yet scoredTrending — 4 sources updated this week
—
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • No CVSS published and no exploitation signals yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS v2: —Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

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

Bluetooth: MSFT: validate evt_prefix_len against the response length

read_supported_features() only checks that the response covers the fixed part of struct msft_rp_read_supported_features, which is 11 bytes:

if (skb->len < sizeof(*rp)) { bt_dev_err(hdev, "MSFT supported features length mismatch"); goto failed; }

evt_prefix[] is a flexible array member and rp->evt_prefix_len is an unvalidated u8 taken straight out of that response, so

msft->evt_prefix = kmemdup(rp->evt_prefix, rp->evt_prefix_len, GFP_KERNEL);

copies up to 255 bytes from a reply that may have carried none of them. What is copied is data the controller never sent, and it is then used to match incoming vendor events in msft_vendor_evt().

This is not an out-of-bounds access. An skb data allocation always has at least SKB_DATA_ALIGN(sizeof(struct skb_shared_info)) bytes past the payload, which is more than the 255 byte maximum, so the read stays inside the allocation and KASAN does not report it. It is still a read of bytes the host was never given, with the length fully controlled by the controller.

Reject a response that is too short for the prefix it declares.

Verified with an emulated controller over /dev/vhci on a KASAN kernel, with vhci made to advertise an MSFT opcode the way btintel, btqca, btmtk and btrtl do unconditionally. A reply of exactly 11 bytes declaring evt_prefix_len = 255 reaches kmemdup and copies 255 bytes ("skb->len=11 evt_prefix_len=255", with the copied buffer dumped); since the reply ends at the fixed part, all 255 come from past the end of the response. No KASAN report is produced, as expected from the allocation slack described above. With this patch the response is rejected with "MSFT event prefix length mismatch" and msft->evt_prefix is left unset.

CVSS v3
—
EchelonGraph score
Not yet assessedNo source has published severity data for this CVE yet — no CVSS score from NVD or a CNA, no GitHub advisory, and it is not in CISA KEV. This is not a rating of zero; we cannot assess it yet.
EG Score
—
EG Risk
—
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
10th
KEV
Not listed

Published

September 17, 2026

Last Modified

September 17, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-90251(2)

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

Affected Packages

(4 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (360 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
linux-6.126.12.100-1~deb12u1, 6.12.101-1~deb12u1, 6.12.107-1~deb12u1
  • every version up to 6.12.111-1~deb12u1: fixed in 6.12.111-1~deb12u1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 6.12.96-1 (35 versions)
  • every version up to 6.12.111-1: fixed in 6.12.111-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (179 versions)
  • every version up to 7.2.6-1: fixed in 7.2.6-1
—

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 12× in last 7d / 30× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. 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. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-05 09:52 UTCVendor advisory
  2. 2026-10-05 09:52 UTCGHSA enrichment
  3. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-10-02 11:16 UTCVendor advisory
  5. 2026-10-02 11:16 UTCGHSA enrichment
  6. 2026-10-01 19:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-09-30 15:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-09-29 12:40 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-09-29 12:40 UTCVendor advisory
  10. 2026-09-29 12:40 UTCGHSA enrichment
  11. 2026-09-28 13:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-09-28 13:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-09-27 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-09-26 14:04 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-09-26 14:04 UTCGHSA enrichment
  17. 2026-09-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  18. 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-09-23 15:00 UTCVendor advisory
  20. 2026-09-23 15:00 UTCGHSA enrichment
  21. 2026-09-22 16:01 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-09-21 21:09 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  24. 2026-09-20 16:24 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-09-20 16:24 UTCVendor advisory
Show 5 more
  1. 2026-09-20 16:24 UTCGHSA enrichment
  2. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-09-17 17:24 UTCNVD update
  4. 2026-09-17 16:37 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-09-17 16:19 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-90251?
CVE-2026-90251 is a publicly disclosed vulnerability published on September 17, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Bluetooth: MSFT: validate evtprefixlen against the response length readsupportedfeatures() only checks that the response covers the fixed part of struct msftrpreadsupportedfeatures, which is 11 bytes: if (skb->len < sizeof(*rp)) {…
When was CVE-2026-90251 disclosed?
CVE-2026-90251 was first published on September 17, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-90251 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-90251 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (10th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-90251?
No fix for CVE-2026-90251 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-90251 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-2026-90251

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-90251?

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