CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2026-5071

CVE-2026-5071 — can: Local Denial of Service via SocketCAN Send

The SocketCAN implementation validates the length of a user-provided buffer containing a socketcan_frame object using only a NET_ASSERT statement in zcan_sendto_ctx() before dereferencing it in socketcan_to_can_frame(). In production builds where assertions are disabled, a userspace application that controls the length passed to a sendto syscall can supply an incomplete or truncated frame, causing socketcan_to_can_frame() to dereference fields beyond the end of the buffer. This results in an out-of-bounds read that can cause denial-of-service crashes or, because the parsed frame contents are transmitted on the network, leak adjacent memory.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, zephyr

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

zephyrproject rtos

zephyr

CVSS base

6.1

MEDIUM

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Products (1)

zephyr

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
6.1CVSS 3.1MEDIUMcvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-125

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

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 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.