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: 0.3%CVSS: 4.3Exploit: 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).
gptp_mi_qualify_announce() in subsys/net/l2/ethernet/gptp/gptp_mi.c walks the Path Trace TLV of a received IEEE 802.1AS Announce message, comparing each clock identity against the local one. The loop bound was taken solely from the attacker-controlled wire field announce->steps_removed (accepted up to 254), never from announce->tlv.len, which is the field that states how many identities the TLV actually carries. Because path_sequence is the flexible member of the wire TLV (struct gptp_path_trace_tlv) and GPTP_ANNOUNCE() yields a raw pointer into the received packet buffer, the memcmp() inside the loop can address memory well past the end of the received frame.
The stack's only length validation, GPTP_ANNOUNCE_CHECK_LEN(), requires the received gPTP payload to be exactly 68 + tlv.len bytes — so it does not constrain the loop, it guarantees the data is absent. An unauthenticated attacker on the same Ethernet segment can send a single Announce frame declaring tlv.len = 0 with steps_removed = 254; the frame passes the length check and reception path (net_gptp_recv() → gptp_handle_msg() → gptp_mi_qualify_announce()), which performs no authentication, and the loop then reads 255 entries of 8 bytes each — about 2 KB — beyond the end of the network buffer.
The impact is an out-of-bounds read. The bytes read are only used as a memcmp() operand and are never returned to the attacker, so there is no meaningful information disclosure; the practical risk is that the overread crosses a network buffer pool boundary into unmapped or MPU-protected memory and faults the networking RX thread, causing a denial of service. Exposure is limited to builds that enable the opt-in, experimental CONFIG_NET_GPTP (TSN/AVB deployments) and to attackers with layer-2 adjacency, since gPTP frames are sent to a link-local multicast address and are not routed.
The fix computes the true entry count as tlv.len / GPTP_CLOCK_ID_LEN and rejects the announce when steps_removed + 1 exceeds it, so the loop can no longer run past the data the packet-length check proved present.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (4.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 4.3 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
- 0.3% 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