CVE-2026-75085

MEDIUMPre-NVD 4.24.2
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

This medium-severity CVE scores 4.2 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.2% (10th 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-2026-101342 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

4.2EG
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: 0.2%CVSS: 4.2Exploit: 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).

The STM32WBA IEEE 802.15.4 driver in drivers/ieee802154/ieee802154_stm32wba.c computed the packet length of a received frame as pkt_len = rx_frame->length - IEEE802154_FCS_LENGTH without first checking that the radio-reported length could hold an FCS. pkt_len is a uint8_t, so a reported length of 0 or 1 wrapped to 254 or 255. The only bound on the resulting value was __ASSERT_NO_MSG(pkt_len <= CONFIG_NET_BUF_DATA_SIZE), which compiles to nothing in the default production configuration (CONFIG_ASSERT=n).

The length originates in the ST link-layer receive-done metadata (p_metadata->length, stored by stm32wba_802154_receive_done()), and ultimately in the PHY header of a frame received over the air, so it is influenced by any attacker within radio range of the device. Reaching the underflow requires the vendor link layer to surface a frame shorter than the FCS with no error; the driver performed no validation of its own on that value.

When the underflow occurs, stm32wba_802154_rx_thread() calls net_pkt_write(pkt, rx_frame->psdu, pkt_len) with a length of about 254 bytes against a receive buffer that holds at most one PHY packet (IEEE802154_MAX_PHY_PACKET_SIZE, 127 bytes). This reads roughly 128 bytes past the end of the radio receive buffer and copies that adjacent memory into a network packet that is submitted to the networking stack, giving an out-of-bounds read with a potential disclosure of adjacent RAM plus needless oversized packet allocation in the RX thread.

The fix rejects a frame whose reported length is smaller than IEEE802154_FCS_LENGTH before the subtraction, and replaces the compiled-out assertion with a runtime length check that drops oversized frames — matching the runtime check already present in drivers/ieee802154/ieee802154_nrf5.c.

CVSS v3
4.2
EG Score
4.2MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
19
EG Risk 19/100

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)
Severity42% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 4.2 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 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
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
10th
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 (4.2): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.2 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
4.2 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
0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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

October 14, 2026

Last Modified

October 16, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 15, 2026
Fix referenced — no release confirmed yet. Sources: github_commit, github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

Out-of-bounds read from received-frame length underflow in the STM32WBA IEEE 802.15.4 driver · Advisory · zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr · GitHub

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/security/advisories/GHSA-w7pm-4r95-c9vr
GitHub commit

commit 46f8af4f5ee4 (zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr)

Fix landed in zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr commit 46f8af4f5ee4 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/commit/46f8af4f5ee472abc13b0291c44fdfe4ed879aaa

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 24× 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. 2026-11-01 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  2. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  3. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  4. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  5. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  6. 2026-10-28 02:25 UTCOSV refresh
  7. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  8. 2026-10-26 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  10. 2026-10-25 14:03 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  12. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 10th percentile
  13. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  14. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  15. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  16. 2026-10-18 03:13 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  18. 2026-10-16 18:15 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-16 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  20. 2026-10-16 16:01 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 9th percentile
  22. 2026-10-14 18:32 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-14 16:57 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 4.2 MEDIUM
  24. 2026-10-14 16:54 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-75085?
CVE-2026-75085 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 14, 2026. The STM32WBA IEEE 802.15.4 driver in drivers/ieee802154/ieee802154_stm32wba.c computed the packet length of a received frame as pkt_len = rx_frame->length - IEEE802154_FCS_LENGTH without first checking that the radio-reported length could hold an FCS. pkt_len is a uint8_t, so a reported length of 0…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-75085 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-75085 was published on October 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 October 16, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-75085 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-75085 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (10th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-75085?
CVE-2026-75085 has a CVSS base score of 4.2 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-75085?
A fix for CVE-2026-75085 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-2026-75085

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-75085?

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