Unknown

CVE-2022-50778 — fortify: Fix __compiletime_strlen() under UBSAN_BOUNDS_LOCAL

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fortify: Fix __compiletime_strlen() under UBSAN_BOUNDS_LOCAL With CONFIG_FORTIFY=y and CONFIG_UBSAN_LOCAL_BOUNDS=y enabled, we observe a runtime panic while running Android's Compatibility Test Suite's (CTS) android.hardware.input.cts.tests. This is stemming from a strlen() call in hidinput_allocate(). __compiletime_strlen() is implemented in terms of __builtin_object_size(), then does an array access to check for NUL-termination. A quirk of __builtin_object_size() is that for strings whose values are runtime dependent, __builtin_object_size(str, 1 or 0) returns the maximum size of possible values when those sizes are determinable at compile time. Example: static const char *v = "FOO BAR"; static const char *y = "FOO BA"; unsigned long x (int z) { // Returns 8, which is: // max(__builtin_object_size(v, 1), __builtin_object_size(y, 1)) return __builtin_object_size(z ? v : y, 1); } So when FORTIFY_SOURCE is enabled, the current implementation of __compiletime_strlen() will try to access beyond the end of y at runtime using the size of v. Mixed with UBSAN_LOCAL_BOUNDS we get a fault. hidinput_allocate() has a local C string whose value is control flow dependent on a switch statement, so __builtin_object_size(str, 1) evaluates to the maximum string length, making all other cases fault on the last character check. hidinput_allocate() could be cleaned up to avoid runtime calls to strlen() since the local variable can only have literal values, so there's no benefit to trying to fortify the strlen call site there. Perform a __builtin_constant_p() check against index 0 earlier in the macro to filter out the control-flow-dependant case. Add a KUnit test for checking the expected behavioral characteristics of FORTIFY_SOURCE internals.

Published Dec 24, 2025 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Linux

Low

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.

How the score was calculated

EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+2

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation

Not confirmed

Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.

EPSS FIRST

0.24%

ahead of 14% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026

Affects

Linux

CVSS base

—

Score not published yet.

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Linux Linux).
No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Linux	Linux	≥ 3009f891bb9f328945ebd5b71e12df7e2467f3dd and < ed42391164e6839a48aaf4c53eefda516835e799≥ 3009f891bb9f328945ebd5b71e12df7e2467f3dd and < 5d59ad2bfb35fccfe2ad5e8bb8801f6224d3f7d4≥ 3009f891bb9f328945ebd5b71e12df7e2467f3dd and < d07c0acb4f41cc42a0d97530946965b3e4fa68c1version 5.16	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.24%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

Not enough vector or weakness data: use the affected application’s logs as a starting point.

application logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

2026
Record published
Oct 13, 2026
Affected products added · linux/linux
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Source status changed · → Deferred
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
2025
CVE published
Dec 24, 2025 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

3 on the record

git.kernel.org/stable/c/d07c0acb4f41cc42a0d97530946965b3e4fa68c1
NIST National Vulnerability Database
git.kernel.org/stable/c/ed42391164e6839a48aaf4c53eefda516835e799
NIST National Vulnerability Database
git.kernel.org/stable/c/5d59ad2bfb35fccfe2ad5e8bb8801f6224d3f7d4
NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Linux
every CVE for this vendor

Related CVEs (same products)

Critical CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 11h
Unknown CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 11h
Unknown CVE-2026-98424 wifi: cfg80211: undo netns switch if renaming the wiphy fails 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98425 wifi: mac80211: don't warn when an IBSS has no channel to scan 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98426 wifi: mwifiex: fix IRQ leak using wrong index in MSI-X error path 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call 1d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No CVSS score published by NVD, the CNA, CISA or GitHub so far.
No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
No CISA SSVC assessment.
No CWE classification.
No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2022-50778 is "fortify: Fix __compiletime_strlen() under UBSAN_BOUNDS_LOCAL", rated Unknown. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. EPSS 0.24% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.