CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-6688NVD status: Analyzed

FatFs: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input

CVE-2026-6688 is a high-severity buffer copy without checking size of input vulnerability in FatFs from ChaN, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.6 out of 10. It can be exploited with physical access to the device by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected FatFs versions: R0.16 and earlier. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.32% 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. Check which version of FatFs you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
ChaNFatFsR0.16 and earlierNot stated

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
PhysicalThe attacker must physically touch the device.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
ChangedThe attack can reach beyond the vulnerable component into other systems.
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:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA.

Official description

FatFs R0.16 and earlier contains a downstream-caller vulnerability pattern associated with FatFs long filename handling. With LFN enabled, fno.fname can be up to 255 characters; many callers copy it into short fixed buffers without bounds checks, causing overflow. This maps to CWE-120 (Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input). Estimated CVSS v3.1 vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H (7.6, High). The estimated CISA SSVC vectors are Exploitation: PoC, Technical Impact: Total.

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

The underlying weakness: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input

The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output 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 Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input vulnerabilities (CWE-120)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Third-party and government advisories

Technical write-ups (may include proof of concept)

Other references

Other vulnerabilities in FatFs

All FatFs vulnerabilities

Recent Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.