CVE Intelligence
Medium Memory corruption

CVE-2026-82388 — Use of a released HFP HF object after a failed RFCOMM connect in the Bluetooth Classic host

bt_hfp_hf_connect() in subsys/bluetooth/host/classic/hfp_hf.c allocates the per-connection HFP Hands-Free object with hfp_hf_create(), which starts an SDP discovery by passing the object's embedded hf->sdp_param to bt_sdp_discover(). That call links the caller-owned parameter block into the SDP client's request list (session->reqs in subsys/bluetooth/host/classic/sdp.c). If the subsequent bt_rfcomm_dlc_connect() then failed, the affected code wiped the entire object with (void)memset(new_hf, 0, sizeof(*new_hf)) while that discovery was still outstanding, zeroing the sys_snode_t _node that is still linked in the SDP client's list along with the request's func, uuid and pool pointers, and zeroing the hf->slc_work work item that may already be queued on the system workqueue. The discovery could not be retracted instead: bt_sdp_discover_cancel() is declared in include/zephyr/bluetooth/classic/sdp.h but has no implementation. The failing branch is reachable with peer-supplied input. The documented use of bt_hfp_hf_connect() is to pass the RFCOMM channel read out of the remote Audio Gateway's SDP record; neither bt_sdp_get_proto_param() nor bt_hfp_hf_connect() range-checks that value, so a remote device advertising an HFP AG record with an RFCOMM channel outside 1-30 makes bt_rfcomm_dlc_connect() return -EINVAL and drives the local device into the wipe. The same branch is reached without any application misuse when the remote peer controls connection timing, for example when the RFCOMM session is in BT_RFCOMM_STATE_DISCONNECTING or the ACL is dropped between object creation and the RFCOMM call. Once the object has been wiped, the Bluetooth host continues to use it: sdp_client_alloc_buf() dereferences session->param->pool, which is now NULL, and the SDP receive paths call session->param->func() through a null function pointer, neither of which is NULL-checked. Because the wipe also clears hf->acl, the pool slot is considered free and a retry or an incoming HFP connection re-appends the same still-linked list node, turning session->reqs into a self-referential list that the host's list walkers never leave. The result is a fault or an unrecoverable hang in the Bluetooth host thread; the stray indirect call is through an all-zero pointer whose target the attacker does not control, so the practical impact is denial of service. The fix keeps the object allocated and marks it with a new BT_HFP_HF_FLAG_RELEASING flag, letting bt_hfp_hf_discover_cb() release it once the discovery completes instead of destroying it under the SDP client. Only builds with CONFIG_BT_CLASSIC and CONFIG_BT_HFP_HF enabled are affected.

Published Oct 26, 2026 · Updated Oct 26, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · 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 29, 2026
Affects
Zephyrproject
Zephyr
CVSS base
5.3
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 ≥ 4.4.0 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
Adjacent
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
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
5.3 CVSS 3.1 Medium 1.6 3.6 vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.3 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — zephyr via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-416 · Use After Free

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 27, 2026 → Oct 29, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 0.21%

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.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)crash dumps

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Source status changed · Received → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 26, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Affected products added · zephyrproject/zephyr
    Oct 26, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 26, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 26, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 5.3
    Oct 26, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Received
    Oct 26, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 26, 2026 · Alertas do Telegram
  • CVE published
    Oct 26, 2026 · zephyr

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× References added · Oct 26, 2026 – Oct 26, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 26, 2026 – Oct 26, 2026

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Zephyrproject
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-416
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 2d
  • Medium CVE-2026-82962 Out-of-bounds write in Zephyr Ethernet L2 when adding the link-layer header to a forwarded packet 2d
  • 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 4d
  • High CVE-2026-81038 Bluetooth OTS server discloses uninitialized stack memory in failed Calculate Checksum responses 4d
  • Medium CVE-2026-81039 Bluetooth Host connection reservation leak when multiple connectable advertising sets share an identity 4d
  • Low CVE-2026-82390 Cross-session AES key confusion in the Espressif ESP32 hardware crypto driver 4d

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-2026-82388 is "Use of a released HFP HF object after a failed RFCOMM connect in the Bluetooth Classic host", 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 5.3 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.