Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-43171 is a medium-severity Wrap or Wraparound (CWE-191) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 2th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-16 (Memory Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-27730
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: EFI/CPER: don't dump the entire memory region The current logic at cper_print_fw_err() doesn't check if the error record length is big enough to handle offset. On a bad firmware, if…
more
the ofset is above the actual record, length -= offset will underflow, making it dump the entire memory. The end result can be: - the logic taking a lot of time dumping large regions of memory; - data disclosure due to the memory dumps; - an OOPS, if it tries to dump an unmapped memory region. Fix it by checking if the section length is too small before doing a hex dump. [ rjw: Subject tweaks ]
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Kernel info leak via malformed CPER records enables memory disclosure (T1005) and supports privilege escalation exploits (T1068) via KASLR bypass or crashes.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires validation of input fields (section length vs. offset) before any memory-region processing or hex dump, blocking the CWE-191 underflow.
Enforces memory-access protections that limit the ability of kernel code to read or dump arbitrary/unmapped regions even when length validation fails.
Requires integrity verification of firmware-supplied error records before they are parsed or dumped, reducing the chance of malformed CPER data reaching cper_print_fw_err.
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 prevent integer underflow defects via input validation, bounds checking, and static analysis.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis can surface underflow flaws after they are introduced.
Routine patching can remediate known underflow bugs once they are discovered in deployed 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 catches integer underflow defects before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer underflow.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid underflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe safe integer handling and overflow/underflow prevention.