CVE-2026-15924

MEDIUMPre-NVD 5.95.9
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This medium-severity CVE scores 5.9 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.4% (35th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-77776 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

5.9EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorNo release containing the referenced fix is confirmed: check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 5.9Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but no release containing it is confirmed — find the release that contains it; until it is applied, mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation).

Zephyr's TLS socket layer in subsys/net/lib/sockets/sockets_tls.c keeps a single process-global array, client_cache, of cached client sessions that is shared by every TLS socket context. The functions that mutate and read it — tls_session_save(), tls_session_get(), tls_session_cache_reset(), and the settings restore handler — allocate, free, and dereference each entry's heap buffer (entry->session). Before the fix these accesses were serialized only by the per-socket context mutex ctx->lock (assigned per socket in ctx_set_lock()), which provides no mutual exclusion between different sockets touching the shared cache.

Because CONFIG_NET_SOCKETS_TLS_MAX_CLIENT_SESSION_COUNT defaults to 1, any two concurrent client sockets contend for the same slot. A thread in tls_session_get() reading entry->session inside mbedtls_ssl_session_load() can run concurrently with another thread in tls_session_save() that selects the same entry for reuse and executes mbedtls_free(entry->session) before reallocating — a use-after-free read, and a double-free when two saves evict the same entry. Both corrupt the mbedTLS heap. The cache is reached on ordinary client paths: at connect time via tls_session_store()/tls_session_restore(), and (on main) whenever a TLS 1.3 session ticket arrives during recv()/poll() via tls_session_store_current().

Exploitation requires an application that opts into per-socket client session caching (the TLS_SESSION_CACHE socket option, off by default) and runs concurrent TLS client connections on multiple threads; the timing that opens the window is influenced by the remote peer(s), so a malicious or compromised server can raise session-ticket frequency to widen it. The reliably-demonstrable impact is memory corruption leading to a crash or heap corruption (denial of service). The fix adds a dedicated session_cache_lock mutex taken across every accessor of client_cache, serializing all reads and frees and closing the race.

CVSS v3
5.9
EG Score
5.9MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
27
EG Risk 27/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity59% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.9 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.3% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
35th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (5.9): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.9 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
5.9 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.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 every mission impact level.

A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). 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

Published

September 14, 2026

Last Modified

September 14, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Sep 14, 2026
Fix referenced — no release confirmed yet. Sources: github_commit, github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

Use-after-free / double-free from unsynchronized concurrent access to the TLS client session cache in Zephyr sockets · Advisory · zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr · GitHub

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/security/advisories/GHSA-wcgm-pq6x-v2gf
GitHub commit

commit 7f9d8ee32ba9 (zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr)

Fix landed in zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr commit 7f9d8ee32ba9 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/commit/7f9d8ee32ba9a93fc1dbb192ca2a591ac0853bdc

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 44× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  3. 2026-10-31 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  4. 2026-10-31 07:55 UTCOSV refresh
  5. 2026-10-30 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  6. 2026-10-29 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  7. 2026-10-28 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  8. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  9. 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  10. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 35th percentile
  11. 2026-10-25 14:47 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  13. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  14. 2026-10-23 06:22 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-22 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  16. 2026-10-21 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  17. 2026-10-20 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  18. 2026-10-19 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  19. 2026-10-18 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  20. 2026-10-18 04:01 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-17 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  22. 2026-10-16 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  23. 2026-10-15 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  24. 2026-10-14 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  25. 2026-10-13 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
Show 49 more
  1. 2026-10-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  2. 2026-10-12 16:31 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-11 19:43 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-11 17:22 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-11 14:54 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  7. 2026-10-10 20:20 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-10 19:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  9. 2026-10-09 21:37 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-09 20:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  11. 2026-10-08 22:53 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-08 17:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  13. 2026-10-07 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  14. 2026-10-06 18:41 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-06 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  16. 2026-10-05 19:58 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-05 17:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  18. 2026-10-04 23:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  19. 2026-10-03 22:33 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-03 14:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  21. 2026-10-02 23:40 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-02 00:20 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-01 19:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  24. 2026-10-01 01:38 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-09-30 15:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  26. 2026-09-30 02:55 UTCEG score recompute
  27. 2026-09-29 15:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  28. 2026-09-29 04:13 UTCEG score recompute
  29. 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  30. 2026-09-28 05:30 UTCEG score recompute
  31. 2026-09-27 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  32. 2026-09-27 06:48 UTCEG score recompute
  33. 2026-09-26 15:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 21st percentile
  34. 2026-09-26 08:04 UTCEG score recompute
  35. 2026-09-25 09:21 UTCEG score recompute
  36. 2026-09-24 10:38 UTCEG score recompute
  37. 2026-09-23 11:52 UTCEG score recompute
  38. 2026-09-22 13:09 UTCEG score recompute
  39. 2026-09-21 14:26 UTCEG score recompute
  40. 2026-09-19 16:59 UTCEG score recompute
  41. 2026-09-18 19:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 23rd percentile
  42. 2026-09-17 19:32 UTCEG score recompute
  43. 2026-09-16 18:43 UTCEG score recompute
  44. 2026-09-16 14:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 23rd percentile
  45. 2026-09-16 05:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 23rd percentile
  46. 2026-09-14 20:23 UTCEG score recompute
  47. 2026-09-14 20:15 UTCEG score recompute
  48. 2026-09-14 19:39 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 5.9 MEDIUM
  49. 2026-09-14 19:39 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-15924?
CVE-2026-15924 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 14, 2026. Zephyr's TLS socket layer in subsys/net/lib/sockets/sockets_tls.c keeps a single process-global array, client_cache, of cached client sessions that is shared by every TLS socket context. The functions that mutate and read it — tls_session_save(), tls_session_get(), tls_session_cache_reset(), and…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-15924 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-15924 was published on September 14, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of September 14, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-15924 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-15924 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (35th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-15924?
CVE-2026-15924 has a CVSS base score of 5.9 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-15924?
A fix for CVE-2026-15924 is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but EchelonGraph has no release containing it on record. Check that reference and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains the fix and update to it; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-15924

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-15924?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.