CVE-2026-43182
Linux Kernel 3.5 – 5.15.202
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-43182 is a medium-severity Divide By Zero (CWE-369) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 3th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-27742
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: media: ccs: Avoid possible division by zero Calculating maximum M for scaler configuration involves dividing by MIN_X_OUTPUT_SIZE limit register's value. Albeit the value is presumably non-zero, the driver was missing…
more
the check it in fact was. Fix this.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Kernel driver division-by-zero (CWE-369) in media scaler config can be triggered locally to cause a kernel panic/oops, directly enabling endpoint DoS via system exploitation.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires validation of the MIN_X_OUTPUT_SIZE register value to ensure it is non-zero before the division that computes maximum M for the scaler.
Mandates developer testing that exercises boundary conditions on hardware register values, which would have detected the missing zero check.
Drives prompt application of the kernel patch that adds the missing non-zero guard in the ccs scaler configuration path.
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 include code analysis, input validation, and testing that prevent divide-by-zero errors.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover divide-by-zero flaws via static analysis or testing.
Routine patching and replacement can remediate divide-by-zero bugs present 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 can detect divide-by-zero conditions before release.
Secure development lifecycle includes input validation and error-handling practices that can prevent divide-by-zero faults.
Application security requirements can mandate checks for zero denominators and safe arithmetic handling.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive coding patterns that avoid arithmetic exceptions.
Secure coding standards directly require validation to prevent divide-by-zero and similar runtime faults.