← All CVEs

CVE-2026-13480

LOW 3.1

Published 2026-08-26 · Last modified 2026-08-26

The LoRaWAN TS004 Fragmented Data Block Transport handler frag_transport_package_callback() in subsys/lorawan/services/frag_transport.c parses downlink command bytes without validating that enough payload bytes remain before each access. The loop's only bound is rx_pos < len; after consuming the one-byte command id the handler cast rx_buf + rx_pos to a 10-byte struct frag_transport_setup_req, and for a DATA_FRAGMENT command passed &rx_buf[rx_pos] to the fragment decoder, which reads exactly ctx.frag_size bytes — with no remaining-length check in either case. The fragment size is attacker-chosen in a preceding FRAG_SESSION_SETUP command (ctx.frag_size = req->frag_size, capped at CONFIG_LORAWAN_FRAG_TRANSPORT_MAX_FRAG_SIZE, default 232). rx_buf aliases the 255-byte static MacCtx.RxPayload buffer in the loramac-node MAC layer, while len is the actual decrypted payload length. By padding a downlink with mismatched-index DATA_FRAGMENT filler commands (each advancing rx_pos by three bytes without producing an answer) and appending one matching-index fragment near the end of the payload, an attacker can make the decoder read up to roughly frag_size bytes past the end of RxPayload, copying adjacent static memory into the decoder buffers and the FUOTA flash image. The handler runs only on downlinks that have already passed the LoRaWAN frame MIC and FRMPayload decryption, so the defect is reachable only by a party holding the device's session keys (the FUOTA server or an attacker who has compromised those keys). The out-of-bounds bytes are never returned to the sender — the only uplink emitted is a status answer carrying fragment counts — so there is no direct disclosure channel, and on typical flat-memory LoRaWAN MCUs the over-read stays within mapped memory, making a crash unlikely. The impact is therefore a bounded out-of-bounds read with limited confidentiality consequence and no write or control-flow primitive. The fix adds remaining-length guards before each access.

NO EXPLOITATION SIGNALS

No known exploitation, public exploit, or elevated probability at this time. Track for changes.

Exploitation likelihood

0.2%chance of exploitation in 30 days · 6th percentile

○ In CISA KEV ○ Public exploit / PoC

Impact if exploited

3.1CVSS 3.1 · LOW

  • ConfidentialityLow
  • IntegrityNone
  • AvailabilityLow

What an attacker needs

  • Access: Must sit on the same / adjacent network
  • Privileges: Requires an admin / high-privilege account
  • User interaction: No user interaction needed
  • Complexity: Needs a race window or specific setup

✓ lowers the bar for an attacker · ⚠ raises it

Proof of concept & exploit code

Test against your own equipment

curl -s https://vulnpedia.com/cve/CVE-2026-13480/poc.jsonMachine-readable PoC index for this CVE (for automation).

Listed for defensive triage, patch verification, and authorized testing on systems you own. Machine-readable: /cve/CVE-2026-13480/poc.json

Affected

Vendors Zephyrproject

Products Zephyr

Weakness (CWE)

  • CWE-20: bounds
  • CWE-125: bounds

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L

All CVSS metrics

  • LOW 3.1 v3.1 · CNA Primary
    CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
  • LOW 3.1 v3.1 · NVD Secondary
    CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L

Sources: NVD · CVE.org · EPSS