From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: AL-KERNEL To: kernel-cve@kernelcve.org Subject: [CVE-2026-93065][MODERATE REGULAR] wifi: iwlwifi: fix counter type in iwl_fwrt_dump_error_logs [ Upstream Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 14:24:38 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-AL-KERNEL-CVE: CVE-2026-93065 X-AL-KERNEL-Priority: MODERATE REGULAR X-AL-KERNEL-Severity: MODERATE REGULAR X-AL-KERNEL-Base-Severity: MODERATE X-AL-KERNEL-KPANIC: NO X-AL-KERNEL-ActionableScore: 3 X-AL-KERNEL-ActionableScore-Lower: 2 X-AL-KERNEL-Commit: 8d74cb5fbb7a0d825403a74d18386dc7b22426a9 List-Id: CVE: CVE-2026-93065 Priority: MODERATE REGULAR AL-KERNEL base severity: MODERATE KPANIC flag: NO Patch: wifi: iwlwifi: fix counter type in iwl_fwrt_dump_error_logs [ Upstream Commit: 8d74cb5fbb7a0d825403a74d18386dc7b22426a9 Upstream patch: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?id=8d74cb5fbb7a0d825403a74d18386dc7b22426a9 Original CVE announcement: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/?q=CVE-2026-93065 Analysis date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 14:24:38 -0400 ActionableScore: 3 ActionableScore lower bound: 2 Actionable bucket: Borderline / manual review recommended Manual review required: YES Summary: No one-sentence report phrase was found. ====================================================================== ABOUT THIS REPORT ====================================================================== The original Linux kernel CVE announcement for CVE-2026-93065 is available here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/?q=CVE-2026-93065 The original announcement does not normally provide a security severity estimate, CVSS assessment, or enough information to determine whether the reported kernel bug represents a practically relevant security issue. This report was generated by AL-KERNEL, an AI-assisted Linux kernel vulnerability analysis system developed by Alexander Larkin. It combines an autonomous classifier with LLM-assisted technical analysis and a separate ActionableScore mechanism. The purpose of this report is to prioritize Linux kernel CVEs before manual review, identify cases that require prompt investigation, and support automatic closure of issues that are unlikely to have meaningful security impact. Published priority for this report: MODERATE REGULAR Manual review required: YES A detailed explanation of the methodology and priority rules is included at the end of this message. ====================================================================== AL-KERNEL CLASSIFICATION RESULT ====================================================================== CVE-2026-93065 MODERATE https://www.kernelcve.org/list/?q=CVE-2026-93065 CHECK WITH IMPACT FROM ORIG NN MODERATE Maybe valid. Check manually. Hints by AL-KERNEL: The best (paranoid) CVSS is 'AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H';CWE-190;*CWE-835;CWE-125;Other CVSS 'AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H';BEST CVSS score: '5.9';DESCR 'iwlwifi uses a u8 loop counter while the firmware supplied num_pc value is u32 in iwl_fwrt_dump_error_logs(). If firmware reports more than 255 PC entries, the counter can wrap to zero and the loop may never terminate or may read beyond the allocated pc_data array. For the CVSS the PR:N is used only for the paranoid adjacent Wi-Fi interpretation where an attacker may trigger firmware error handling through wireless reachability without local shell access. The issue is not Internet reachable in the normal sense and depends on Intel Wi-Fi hardware, driver state, and firmware error log contents. Impact is at least denial of service through an infinite loop or CPU lockup. Worst case impact may include limited confidentiality exposure if out of bounds pc_data reads are printed into kernel logs, but the patch does not indicate an arbitrary write or a direct privilege escalation primitive.';YES REQUIRES MANUAL CHECK; ,and ActionableScore result is Borderline / manual review recommended (with actual score 3) YES REMOTE SIMPLEFIX NETWORK DECREASED_TO_MODERATEREG_BASED_ON_ACTIONABLESCORELESSTHAN4 YES NO checked ====================================================================== ACTIONABLESCORE ANALYSIS ====================================================================== ActionableScore=3 ActionableScoreLower=2 PrimitiveClass=CLASS_C RealUAF=NO HostAdminRequired=UNKNOWN NamespaceScopedPrivilege=UNKNOWN ImportantCandidate=NO ManualReview=RECOMMENDED AutoDowngradeAllowed=YES 1. ActionableScore * Raw conservative score: 2 * Conservative score: 2. No floor or cap applied. * Raw paranoid score: 3 * Paranoid score: 3. No floor or cap applied. * Final recommended bucket: **Borderline / manual review recommended**:: 2. Signal breakdown Conservative positive signals: * +1 Reliable kernel crash / strong DoS. The commit states that a u8 loop counter can wrap when firmware reports more than 255 PC entries, causing a loop that may never terminate. * +1 Weak / indirect corruption candidate. The same counter mismatch may cause reads past the allocated pc_data array, but only an OOB read is indicated. Paranoid additional signal: * +1 Firmware-mediated external influence. The vulnerable value comes from firmware error-log data in a Wi-Fi driver, and wireless activity may plausibly influence firmware error paths, but firmware mediation is material. Negative signals: * No host-admin penalty applied. The complete trigger path is unresolved, and host-admin-equivalent privilege is not positively established. * No rare-hardware penalty applied. Intel Wi-Fi hardware is hardware-specific but not automatically rare. * No race/timing penalty applied. This is an integer-width loop bug, not a narrow race. Important non-awarded signals: * RealUAF not awarded. No stale pointer or post-lifetime object use is established. * Controlled reclaim not demonstrated. * Arbitrary write not demonstrated. * Strong LPE or privilege escalation not demonstrated. * Confidentiality not awarded. Although OOB reads may occur, a reliable attacker-readable disclosure path is not established. * Direct remote/network reachability not awarded. The path is firmware-mediated and not ordinary packet-processing reachability. * Extra Availability not awarded. The same infinite loop / CPU lockup is already counted as DoS. 3. Reachability analysis The immediate source of the bad num_pc value is firmware-provided error-log data consumed by iwl_fwrt_dump_error_logs(). A local administrator or privileged actor may be able to affect firmware loading, device state, or debug/error collection paths, but the supplied evidence does not prove that host-admin-equivalent privilege is required for the complete trigger. A wireless-adjacent attacker might be able to provoke firmware error handling through radio activity, but the evidence does not show direct control over num_pc or reliable triggering of the exact dump path. Therefore the paranoid score uses firmware-mediated exposure rather than direct AV:N-style reachability. No namespace-scoped capability chain is established. No prior boot parameter or rare special hardware requirement is proven beyond the presence of affected Intel iwlwifi hardware and firmware behavior. 4. Primitive and severity interpretation The exact primitive is an integer truncation / wraparound in a loop counter: count is u8 while num_pc is u32. If num_pc exceeds 255, count can wrap to zero and the loop condition can remain true indefinitely. The demonstrated consequence is primarily infinite loop / CPU soft lockup / DoS. A possible secondary consequence is OOB read from pc_data, but no useful disclosure, write, UAF, refcount corruption, or privilege boundary bypass is established. This is not active structured-object UAF and not fixed stale storage UAF. There is no concrete repeated release/refcount operation. PrimitiveClass=CLASS_C because the established behavior is crash/DoS/invalid read behavior without an independently useful kernel-corruption primitive. ImportantCandidate=NO because there is no strong exploitation leverage beyond DoS and limited possible OOB read. AutoDowngradeAllowed=YES because no unresolved Class A or strong Class B primitive remains, although manual review is still recommended due to wireless firmware-mediated exposure and possible OOB read. Likely operational severity is ordinary to borderline Moderate, not Important, unless additional evidence shows attacker-readable disclosure, stronger firmware-controlled memory access, or reliable remote triggering. 5. One-sentence report phrase An iwlwifi firmware error log dump can use an 8 bit loop counter for a 32 bit firmware supplied PC entry count, allowing counter wrap when more than 255 entries are reported and causing an infinite loop or possible OOB read with practical impact mainly as DoS. 6. Manual review recommendation MANUAL CHECK RECOMMENDED Reason: wireless-adjacent firmware-mediated reachability and possible OOB read justify human review, but the patch does not establish UAF, write corruption, privilege escalation, or direct remote exploitation. 7. Call-site confidence Call-site confidence: medium ====================================================================== UPSTREAM PATCH SUMMARY ====================================================================== Patch: wifi: iwlwifi: fix counter type in iwl_fwrt_dump_error_logs [ Upstream Commit: 8d74cb5fbb7a0d825403a74d18386dc7b22426a9 Upstream URL: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?id=8d74cb5fbb7a0d825403a74d18386dc7b22426a9 Changed files: drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/fw/dump.c Diff excerpt: Not included in this email. See the upstream URL for the full patch. Full patch: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?id=8d74cb5fbb7a0d825403a74d18386dc7b22426a9 ====================================================================== DETAILED REPORT METHODOLOGY ====================================================================== The original Linux kernel CVE announcement for CVE-2026-93065 can be found here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/?q=CVE-2026-93065 The original CVE announcement normally does not include a security-level estimate. In particular, it may not contain a CVSS assessment, an impact level, or enough information to determine whether the reported bug is a practically relevant security issue. One purpose of this parallel CVE list is to provide that missing technical and prioritization information. The original goal of the AL-KERNEL project was to prioritize Linux kernel CVE analysis automatically before manual review. The system can also help identify non-security issues that may be suitable for automatic closure. This report was generated by AL-KERNEL, an AI-assisted Linux kernel vulnerability analysis system developed by Alexander Larkin. The first analysis stage combines an autonomous classifier with additional LLM-based analysis. The autonomous classifier runs locally on a CPU and is based on a backpropagation neural network. Together, these mechanisms produce a technical vulnerability description, identify likely weakness types, estimate CVSS severity, and provide input for ActionableScore. Two CVSS estimates are retained because incomplete kernel vulnerability information often permits more than one defensible interpretation: Conservative CVSS vector: AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H The Best / paranoid CVSS vector: AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H The Best / paranoid CVSS score: 5.9 The conservative vector represents a lower-impact interpretation. The Best/paranoid vector intentionally represents a plausible upper-bound interpretation and should not automatically be treated as demonstrated real-world impact. CVSS may also need to be adjusted for a particular Linux deployment, because actual reachability, privileges, enabled kernel configuration, hardware, namespaces, exposed device nodes, and other environmental conditions can differ significantly between systems. A separate ActionableScore mechanism evaluates practical remediation urgency. Its analysis may include reachability, attack prerequisites, subsystem exposure, memory-corruption characteristics, denial-of-service reliability, and possible confidentiality, integrity, or privilege-escalation impact. Conservative ActionableScore: 2 Paranoid ActionableScore: 3 The final base severity is taken directly from the second tab-separated field of the AL-KERNEL classification result. ActionableScore does not replace or independently override that final AL-KERNEL decision, and if ActionableScore adjusted impact level of ALKERNEL, then you would see self-readable flags above like INCREASED_TO_HIGH_BASED_ON_ACTIONABLESCOREHIGHEREQTHAN7. For an AL-KERNEL result of MODERATE, this report uses the following additional presentation split: ActionableScore below 5 -> MODERATE REGULAR ActionableScore 5 or more -> MODERATE 7.0 The distinction between MODERATE REGULAR and MODERATE 7.0 makes it possible to identify Moderate issues that should receive manual analysis and fixes before lower-priority MODERATE REGULAR issues. In many cases, MODERATE REGULAR fixes may wait for a later rebase or routine update. There is one override in which MODERATE REGULAR becomes MODERATE 7.0 even when the ActionableScore is below 5. When the AL-KERNEL result contains the KPANIC flag, a MODERATE result is always presented as MODERATE 7.0. The KPANIC flag selected with few regexps without usage of AI at all, so it helps to detect cases when Kernel Crash happens and similar (to filter False-Negative results from the LLM usage). KPANIC indicates that a reliable kernel crash, kernel panic, or similarly serious kernel availability impact was identified by the classification workflow. AL-KERNEL base severity for this report: MODERATE KPANIC detected for this report: NO Published priority for this report (same as in Subject): MODERATE REGULAR These results are intended to support engineering triage. They are machine-generated estimates, and cases marked for manual review should be validated by a human security engineer before final disposition. For more info read docs linked from here: https://kernelcve.org/ (and you can submit you own patch there to generate such a report for non-existant CVE-id yet). Note that in many cases this AI tool selects higher severity, than real is (means you can expect Importants instead of Moderate 7.0 or Moderates 7.0 instead of regular Moderates). If you see such cases, please use reply email interface to add additional manual analyses info to this particular CVE. And please, please, let me know when you see Lows instead of Importants or Important instead of Low (because particular for such cases I need to tune this AI tool to make it better for this one and next similar). My contact email for such notifications is alexanjelausa@gmail.com (and both send reply to CVE record itself too and see "reply" button below for howto reply).