CVE-2026-13481 — Out-of-bounds Read in Zephyrproject Zephyr
The IEEE 1588 PTP management-message parser in subsys/net/lib/ptp/tlv.c mishandles the PTP_MGMT_TIME management id. In tlv_mgmt_post_recv(), the PTP_MGMT_TIME case casts mgmt_tlv->data to a 10-byte struct ptp_timestamp and reads it (then byte-swaps and writes it back) without first checking that the TLV data field is at least sizeof(struct ptp_timestamp). Every sibling management id in the same switch validates its length first; PTP_MGMT_TIME was the only case lacking that check. The length passed in is the management data size (tlv->length - 2), and the upstream guard in ptp_tlv_post_recv() only requires tlv->length > 2, while msg_tlv_post_recv() validates only that the TLV fits within the received byte count, not a per-id minimum. A peer on the local PTP segment can therefore send a PTP_MSG_MANAGEMENT message carrying a short PTP_MGMT_TIME TLV (data as small as 2 bytes), causing the parser to read and write 8 bytes beyond the validated data. The message type and TLV contents are taken straight off the wire, so the path is reachable by any adjacent attacker when CONFIG_PTP is enabled. The over-read and write-back stay within the struct ptp_msg allocation (mgmt_tlv->data lives in the leading mtu[NET_ETH_MTU] union member, so data + 10 lands at most a few bytes past mtu[], inside the same object), so this is an out-of-bounds read of adjacent in-object memory plus a bounded in-place corruption of the message's parsed timestamp, not past-allocation memory corruption. Impact is limited to minor information exposure of adjacent bytes and corruption of the device's parsed management TIME value; there is no crash on the access and no reachable reference-count corruption. The fix adds if (length < sizeof(struct ptp_timestamp)) { return -EBADMSG; } before the cast, matching the other management-id cases and fully closing the receive-path defect.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- Technical severity (medium)+3
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.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
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 (Zephyrproject Zephyr).
- Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (memory corruption), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zephyrproject | Zephyr | ≥ 3.7.0 and ≤ 4.4.1 | Vulnerable | NIST National Vulnerability Database |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.4 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | 2.8 | 2.5 | vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N (score shown at the top: vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Record published
- Fix documented
- CVSS changed · 5.4
- Source status changed · → Analyzed
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
References
2 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- Medium CVE-2026-75083 Integer underflow of the radio-reported frame length causes an out-of-bounds write in the NXP KW41Z IEEE 802.15.4 driver 1d
- Medium CVE-2026-75085 Out-of-bounds read from received-frame length underflow in the STM32WBA IEEE 802.15.4 driver 1d
- Medium CVE-2026-75084 Out-of-bounds write in the TI CC1200 IEEE 802.15.4 driver from an unvalidated radio-supplied packet length 1d
- High CVE-2026-19673 Out-of-bounds read and net_buf length underflow in Zephyr Ethernet L2 when parsing a truncated VLAN header 1d
- Medium CVE-2026-19940 Bluetooth HFP AG reuses a connection slot while a delayable work item is still armed, corrupting kernel timeout bookkeeping 2d
- Medium CVE-2026-19939 Bluetooth Classic AVDTP: stale timeout work on signalling-channel disconnect leads to kernel timeout-list corruption 2d
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 FIRST EPSS score.
- No CISA SSVC assessment.
- 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-2026-13481 is "Out-of-bounds Read in Zephyrproject Zephyr", rated Medium. It affects Zephyr (Zephyrproject); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.4 describes technical severity. 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.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.