Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-10640 is a medium-severity Use After Free (CWE-416) vulnerability in Zephyrproject Zephyr. Its CVSS base score is 4.2 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 30th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-16 (Memory Protection) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-37117
Vulnerability Data
Zephyr's IPv6 Neighbor Discovery send paths (net_ipv6_send_na, net_ipv6_send_ns, net_ipv6_send_rs in subsys/net/ip/ipv6_nbr.c) updated the per-interface ICMP-sent statistics by calling net_pkt_iface(pkt) after net_send_data(pkt) had already returned successfully. On the success path the network stack owns and releases the packet's reference (the L2/driver…
more
send unrefs it, e.g. ethernet_send -> net_pkt_unref), so for a freshly allocated packet with refcount 1 the net_pkt slab block can be freed before the statistics line runs (synchronously when no TX queue thread is configured, or via a concurrent TX thread otherwise). The subsequent net_pkt_iface(pkt) reads pkt->iface from the freed slab block, and with CONFIG_NET_STATISTICS_PER_INTERFACE enabled that loaded pointer is dereferenced to increment iface->stats.icmp.sent, a use-after-free (CWE-416). If the slab block was reallocated in the meantime the read/increment targets unrelated or attacker-influenced memory, yielding corrupted statistics, a fault/crash (denial of service), or potential limited memory corruption. The vulnerable Neighbor Advertisement path is reachable by any unauthenticated on-link node simply by sending ICMPv6 Neighbor Solicitations to a Zephyr node with native IPv6 enabled (handle_ns_input -> net_ipv6_send_na). Affected from v3.3.0 through v4.4.0; the fix uses the already-available iface argument instead of touching the sent packet. Configurations without per-interface statistics dereference only a global counter and are not affected by the memory-safety aspect.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
UAF in network stack reachable via unauthenticated ICMPv6 packets directly enables remote application/system exploitation resulting in crash/DoS (or limited corruption).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires timely remediation of the identified flaw in net_ipv6_send_na/ns/rs that performs the post-send net_pkt_iface dereference.
Enforces memory protection mechanisms that can detect or block the use-after-free access to the freed net_pkt slab block on the statistics update path.
Least-functionality setting can disable CONFIG_NET_STATISTICS_PER_INTERFACE, eliminating the vulnerable dereference of pkt->iface entirely.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly incorporate memory-safety tooling and reviews that prevent most use-after-free defects.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover use-after-free issues via scanning or analysis but do not prevent their introduction.
Routine patching removes known use-after-free instances after they have been introduced in released software.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development can detect use-after-free bugs before release.
Secure SDLC mandates memory-safety practices that reduce use-after-free defects.
Application security requirements can specify memory-management rules that mitigate use-after-free.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety design choices that limit use-after-free exposure.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe avoidance of use-after-free patterns.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.