In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
wifi: rtlwifi: Fix global-out-of-bounds bug in _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit()
There is a global-out-of-bounds reported by KASAN:
BUG: KASAN: global-out-of-bounds in
_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte.part.0+0x3d/0x84 [rtl8821ae]
Read of size 1 at addr ffffffffa0773c43 by task NetworkManager/411
CPU: 6 PID: 411 Comm: NetworkManager Tainted: G D
6.1.0-rc8+ #144 e15588508517267d37
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009),
Call Trace:
...
kasan_report+0xbb/0x1c0
_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte.part.0+0x3d/0x84 [rtl8821ae]
rtl8821ae_phy_bb_config.cold+0x346/0x641 [rtl8821ae]
rtl8821ae_hw_init+0x1f5e/0x79b0 [rtl8821ae]
...
The root cause of the problem is that the comparison order of
"prate_section" in _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit() is wrong. The
_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() is used to compare the first n bytes of the two
strings from tail to head, which causes the problem. In the
_rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit(), it was originally intended to meet
this requirement by carefully designing the comparison order.
For example, "pregulation" and "pbandwidth" are compared in order of
length from small to large, first is 3 and last is 4. However, the
comparison order of "prate_section" dose not obey such order requirement,
therefore when "prate_section" is "HT", when comparing from tail to head,
it will lead to access out of bounds in _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(). As
mentioned above, the _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() has the same function as
strcmp(), so just strcmp() is enough.
Fix it by removing _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() and use strcmp() barely.
Although it can be fixed by adjusting the comparison order of
"prate_section", this may cause the value of "rate_section" to not be
from 0 to 5. In addition, commit "21e4b0726dc6" not only moved driver
from staging to regular tree, but also added setting txpower limit
function during the driver config phase, so the problem was introduced
by this commit.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-28). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it