Security assessments indicate that CVE-2026-82388 presents a notable risk, potentially requiring prompt mitigation.
Status: Awaiting Analysis
Published on: 26 Oct 2026, 17:17 UTC
CVSS Release: version 3
vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org
Secondary
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVE-2026-82388: bt_hfp_hf_connect() in subsys/bluetooth/host/classic/hfp_hf.c allocates the per-connection HFP Hands-Free object with hfp_hf_create(), which starts an SDP discovery by passing the object's embedded hf->sdp_param to bt_sdp_discover(). That call links the caller-owned parameter block into the SDP client's request list (session->reqs in subsys/bluetooth/host/classic/sdp.c). If the subsequent bt_rfcomm_dlc_connect() then failed, the affected code wiped the entire object with (void)memset(new_hf, 0, sizeof(*new_hf)) while that discovery was still outstanding, zeroing the sys_snode_t _node that is still linked in the SDP client's list along with the request's func, uuid and pool pointers, and zeroing the hf->slc_work work item that may already be queued on the system workqueue. The discovery could not be retracted instead: bt_sdp_discover_cancel() is declared in include/zephyr/bluetooth/classic/sdp.h but has no implementation. The failing branch is reachable with peer-supplied input. The documented use of bt_hfp_hf_connect() is to pass the RFCOMM channel read out of the remote Audio Gateway's SDP record; neither bt_sdp_get_proto_param() nor bt_hfp_hf_connect() range-checks that value, so a remote device advertising an HFP AG record with an RFCOMM channel outside 1-30 makes bt_rfcomm_dlc_connect() return -EINVAL and drives the local device into the wipe. The same branch is reached without any application misuse when the remote peer controls connection timing, for example when the RFCOMM session is in BT_RFCOMM_STATE_DISCONNECTING or the ACL is dropped between object creation and the RFCOMM call. Once the object has been wiped, the Bluetooth host continues to use it: sdp_client_alloc_buf() dereferences session->param->pool, which is now NULL, and the SDP receive paths call session->param->func() through a null function pointer, neither of which is NULL-checked. Because the wipe also clears hf->acl, the pool slot is considered free and a retry or an incoming HFP connection re-appends the same still-linked list node, turning session->reqs into a self-referential list that the host's list walkers never leave. The result is a fault or an unrecoverable hang in the Bluetooth host thread; the stray indirect call is through an all-zero pointer whose target the attacker does not control, so the practical impact is denial of service. The fix keeps the object allocated and marks it with a new BT_HFP_HF_FLAG_RELEASING flag, letting bt_hfp_hf_discover_cb() release it once the discovery completes instead of destroying it under the SDP client. Only builds with CONFIG_BT_CLASSIC and CONFIG_BT_HFP_HF enabled are affected.
The exploitability of CVE-2026-82388 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).
CVE-2026-82388 presents a challenge to exploit due to its high attack complexity, but the absence of privilege requirements still makes it a viable target for skilled attackers. A thorough security review is advised.
A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.
Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.
Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-82388, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-82388, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.