In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
HID: multitouch: fix out-of-bounds bit access on mt_io_flags
mt_io_flags is a single unsigned long, but mt_process_slot(),
mt_release_pending_palms() and mt_release_contacts() use it as a
per-slot bitmap indexed by the slot number. That slot number is only
bounded by td->maxcontacts, which is taken from the device's
ContactCountMaximum feature report and can be up to 255, not by
BITS_PER_LONG.
As a result, a multitouch device that advertises a large contact count
makes set_bit()/clear_bit() operate past the mt_io_flags word and
corrupt the adjacent members of struct mt_device. The sticky-fingers
release timer is the easiest way to reach this. mt_release_contacts()
runs
for (i = 0; i < mt->num_slots; i++)
clear_bit(i, &td->mt_io_flags);
with num_slots == maxcontacts. For maxcontacts around 250 the loop
clears the bits that overlap td->applications.next, zeroing that list
head, and the list_for_each_entry() that immediately follows then
dereferences NULL. The kernel panics from timer (softirq) context. On a
KASAN build this shows up as a general protection fault in
mt_release_contacts() with a null-ptr-deref at offset 0x58, which is
offsetof(struct mt_application, num_received).
The state is reachable from an untrusted USB or Bluetooth HID
multitouch device; no local privileges are required.
Store the per-slot active state in a separately allocated bitmap sized
for maxcontacts, the same pattern already used for pending_palm_slots,
and keep only MT_IO_FLAGS_RUNNING in mt_io_flags. The two
"mt_io_flags & MT_IO_SLOTS_MASK" arming checks become
bitmap_empty(td->active_slots, td->maxcontacts).
Move MT_IO_FLAGS_RUNNING back to bit 0. It was bumped to bit 32 by the
same commit to leave the low byte for the slot bits; with the slot bits
gone it fits in bit 0 again, which also keeps it within the unsigned
long on 32-bit.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-11). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it