Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-33317 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Trustedfirmware Op-Tee. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 8th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-33317 affects OP-TEE, a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) designed as a companion to a non-secure Linux kernel on Arm Cortex-A cores using TrustZone technology. The vulnerability stems from missing checks in the `entry_get_attribute_value()` function located in `ta/pkcs11/src/object.c`, present in versions 3.13.0 through 4.10.0. This flaw enables an out-of-bounds (OOB) read from the PKCS#11 Trusted Application (TA) heap, potentially causing a crash. When chained with the OOB read, the PKCS#11 TA functions `PKCS11_CMD_GET_ATTRIBUTE_VALUE` or `entry_get_attribute_value()` can be exploited using a malformed template parameter to read at most 7 bytes beyond the end of the template buffer and write beyond the buffer's end using content from a PKCS#11 object attribute value. It is associated with CWE-125 (OOB read) and CWE-787 (OOB write), with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.7 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L).
A local attacker with low privileges can exploit this vulnerability with low complexity and no user interaction required. The high scope (S:C) allows impact across security boundaries, enabling high confidentiality and integrity effects—such as unauthorized disclosure or modification of sensitive data in the TEE—alongside low availability impact from potential crashes.
Mitigation is provided through patches in OP-TEE commits e031c4e562023fd9f199e39fd2e85797e4cbdca9, 16926d5a46934c46e6656246b4fc18385a246900, and 149e8d7ecc4ef8bb00ab4a37fd2ccede6d79e1ca, which are anticipated to be included in version 4.11.0. Additional details are available in the GitHub Security Advisory at GHSA-8cqw-mg7v-c9p9 and the referenced commit pages.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25379
Vulnerability Data
OP-TEE is a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) designed as companion to a non-secure Linux kernel running on Arm; Cortex-A cores using the TrustZone technology. In versions 3.13.0 through 4.10.0, missing checks in `entry_get_attribute_value()` in `ta/pkcs11/src/object.c` can lead to out-of-bounds read…
more
from the PKCS#11 TA heap or a crash. When chained with the OOB read, the PKCS#11 TA function `PKCS11_CMD_GET_ATTRIBUTE_VALUE` or `entry_get_attribute_value()` can, with a bad template parameter, be tricked into reading at most 7 bytes beyond the end of the template buffer and writing beyond the end of the template buffer with the content of an attribute value of a PKCS#11 object. Commits e031c4e562023fd9f199e39fd2e85797e4cbdca9, 16926d5a46934c46e6656246b4fc18385a246900, and 149e8d7ecc4ef8bb00ab4a37fd2ccede6d79e1ca contain patches and are anticipated to be part of version 4.11.0.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
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-development practices such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 and acceptance includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.