CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-53136NVD status: Analyzed

Linux: Out-of-bounds Write

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-53136 is a high-severity out-of-bounds write vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.8 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 029571d51140650783be4fb98fe7cb4754752086, 5f8b39452fb16f507c9e4d8b4a83ce27e893307c, 4d1c3c26c2ab1842e139e61983395d64bd2e518b as the first without the flaw, so updating Linux to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.13% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update Linux to 029571d51140650783be4fb98fe7cb4754752086 or 5f8b39452fb16f507c9e4d8b4a83ce27e893307c or 4d1c3c26c2ab1842e139e61983395d64bd2e518b or d6be8e59af412623e3d874be3a048406c0edfe60, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  2. Update Linux Kernel to 5.15.210 or 6.1.176 or 6.6.143 or 6.12.94, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
LinuxLinux1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, 029571d51140650783be4fb98fe7cb4754752086; 1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, 5f8b39452fb16f507c9e4d8b4a83ce27e893307c; 1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, 4d1c3c26c2ab1842e139e61983395d64bd2e518b; 1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, d6be8e59af412623e3d874be3a048406c0edfe60; 1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, 3f32d52ec604c659725d865cf8cc6a17a33f9c6a; 1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, 8aaa7e317fbd4beb9c6a9f77aa4cf52fae78b117; 1e8635ea0ea370bf4f0f2b2f1b3eb61474dd962a up to, but not including, fb0707ce00eef4e2d60c3020e1c0432739703e4a; 4.15029571d51140650783be4fb98fe7cb4754752086, 5f8b39452fb16f507c9e4d8b4a83ce27e893307c, 4d1c3c26c2ab1842e139e61983395d64bd2e518b, d6be8e59af412623e3d874be3a048406c0edfe60, 3f32d52ec604c659725d865cf8cc6a17a33f9c6a, 8aaa7e317fbd4beb9c6a9f77aa4cf52fae78b117
LinuxLinux Kernel4.15 up to, but not including, 5.15.210; 5.16 up to, but not including, 6.1.176; 6.2 up to, but not including, 6.6.143; 6.7 up to, but not including, 6.12.94; 6.13 up to, but not including, 6.18.36; 6.19 up to, but not including, 7.0.13; 7.15.15.210, 6.1.176, 6.6.143, 6.12.94, 6.18.36, 7.0.13

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.

Official description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/amd/display: Clamp VBIOS HDMI retimer register count to array size [Why & How] The VBIOS integrated info tables (v1_11 and v2_1) contain HdmiRegNum and Hdmi6GRegNum fields that are used as loop bounds when copying retimer I2C register settings into fixed-size arrays (dp*_ext_hdmi_reg_settings[9] and dp*_ext_hdmi_6g_reg_settings[3]). These u8 fields are not validated before use, so a malformed VBIOS can specify values up to 255, causing an out-of-bounds heap write during driver probe. Clamp each register count to the destination array size using min_t() before the copy loops, in both get_integrated_info_v11() and get_integrated_info_v2_1(). (cherry picked from commit 5a7f0ef90195940c54b0f5bb85b87da55f038c69)

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Out-of-bounds Write

The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.

More Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities (CWE-787)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.