CVE Intelligence
Medium Memory corruption

CVE-2026-78116 — Double free of an RTIO submission in the Broadcom AFBR-S50 sensor driver data-evaluation error path

The Broadcom AFBR-S50 time-of-flight sensor driver double-completes an RTIO submission when sensor data evaluation fails. In data_ready_work_handler() (drivers/sensor/broadcom/afbr_s50/afbr_s50.c), a non-STATUS_OK return from Argus_EvaluateData() calls handle_error_on_result(), which finalises the request with rtio_iodev_sqe_err(), but execution then fell through to the tail of the function and finalised the very same struct rtio_iodev_sqe a second time with rtio_iodev_sqe_ok(). Unlike the other error branches in the same function, this one did not return. Both completion helpers reach rtio_executor_done() in subsys/rtio/rtio_executor.c, which returns the submission to the pool via rtio_sqe_pool_free() and, for streaming (multishot) submissions, also releases the RX buffer with rtio_release_buffer(). The second completion therefore reads a freed rtio_iodev_sqe, pushes the same mpsc node onto the submission queue while it is already on the pool free list — splicing the two lists together — and re-submits the freed request so the next measurement is written through an already-released buffer. For one-shot submissions it emits a spurious success completion carrying stale userdata and frees the same pool entry twice. The failure branch is driven by sensor conditions rather than by host software. The vendor API documents statuses such as ERROR_ARGUS_BIAS_VOLTAGE_REINIT and ERROR_ARGUS_LASER_MONITOR_INACTIVE as transient results of harsh ambient light, so a party in front of the optical sensor can provoke the invalid-data condition without any physical contact with the board or any software access; SPI transfer errors reach the same branch. In releases before the payload.Status check was dropped, ordinary sharp distance transitions in the sensor's field of view were sufficient. Impact is corruption of the RTIO submission pool and mempool bookkeeping: aliased submissions, writes through released buffers, and duplicate completions delivered to the application. The attacker does not control the corrupted content, so the practical consequence is memory corruption and loss of availability on devices that instantiate brcm,afbr-s50, rather than directed code execution. Only builds that enable this driver are affected.

Published Oct 21, 2026 · Updated Oct 23, 2026 · Sources: CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP, NIST National Vulnerability Database · CNA: zephyr

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
  • 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.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.21%
ahead of 11% of scored CVEs · Oct 30, 2026
Affects
Zephyrproject
Zephyr
CVSS base
5.2
Medium · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

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.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Zephyrproject Zephyr).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. 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.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Zephyrproject Zephyr ≥ 4.3.0 and < 4.5.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Physical
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
5.2 CVSS 3.1 Medium 0.9 4.2 vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.2 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — zephyr via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H (score shown at the top: vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-415 · Double Free

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 22, 2026 → Oct 30, 2026 · 9 reading(s) · max 0.21%

Detection

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

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
  • Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)crash dumps

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 23, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Source status changed · Received → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 22, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · Published → Received
    Oct 21, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record published
    Oct 21, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 5.2
    Oct 21, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Source status changed · → Published
    Oct 21, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 21, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • CVE published
    Oct 21, 2026 · zephyr

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 21, 2026 – Oct 21, 2026

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Zephyrproject
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-415
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • High CVE-2026-82961 Unvalidated pin index in GPIO syscall handlers allows out-of-bounds kernel writes from user mode 3d
  • Medium CVE-2026-82962 Out-of-bounds write in Zephyr Ethernet L2 when adding the link-layer header to a forwarded packet 3d
  • High CVE-2026-81038 Bluetooth OTS server discloses uninitialized stack memory in failed Calculate Checksum responses 5d
  • Medium CVE-2026-81039 Bluetooth Host connection reservation leak when multiple connectable advertising sets share an identity 5d
  • Medium CVE-2026-82388 Use of a released HFP HF object after a failed RFCOMM connect in the Bluetooth Classic host 5d
  • Medium CVE-2026-82389 Bluetooth Classic HFP AG wipes an object still linked in the SDP request list on connect failure, causing a NULL dereference 5d

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 fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • 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-2026-78116 is "Double free of an RTIO submission in the Broadcom AFBR-S50 sensor driver data-evaluation error path", 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 5.2 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.21% 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.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.