MediumCVE-2026-78116

Double free of an RTIO submission in the Broadcom AFBR-S50 sensor driver data-evaluation error path (CVE-2026-78116)

Published 21.10.2026Last modified 23.10.2026Sources: CVE.org

What is affected, what to do

Update Zephyrproject Zephyr to version 4.5.0.

Affected: Zephyrproject Zephyr lt 4.3.0..4.5.0
Fixed in: Zephyrproject Zephyr 4.5.0

Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability

Metrics

5.2

Priority

XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.

Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v3

5.2

CVSS v3

Severity Medium on the scale from 0 to 10.

Source: CVE.org

0.2 %

EPSS score

Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.

Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 10.6

Show all metrics

Severity: Medium
Priority (0–325) The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first? Read in glossary: 56.90 Methodology
Exploit maturity An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack. Read in glossary: no public PoC known
XIEM Effective CVSS XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command. Read in glossary: 5.2 Methodology
CVSS v3 CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions. Read in glossary: 5.2
EPSS score The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“. Read in glossary: 0.2 %; Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
EPSS percentile The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking. Read in glossary: 10.6; Elevated — this CVE ranks above at least 10% of all CVEs scored today.
KEV status The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching. Read in glossary: —
Published: 21.10.2026
CWE CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect. Read in glossary: CWE-415

Detection rules

No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.

Classification under NIS2 and CRA

Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.

NIS2 NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management. Read in glossary: Handle the vulnerability in regular vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2.
CRA The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates. Read in glossary: From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security. Read in glossary: Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.

Description

The Broadcom AFBR-S50 time-of-flight sensor driver double-completes an RTIO submission when sensor data evaluation fails. In data_ready_work_handler() (drivers/sensor/broadcom/afbr_s50/afbr_s50.c), a non-STATUS_OK return from Argus_EvaluateData() calls handle_error_on_result(), which finalises the request with rtio_iodev_sqe_err(), but execution then fell through to the tail of the function and finalised the very same struct rtio_iodev_sqe a second time with rtio_iodev_sqe_ok(). Unlike the other error branches in the same function, this one did not return. Both completion helpers reach rtio_executor_done() in subsys/rtio/rtio_executor.c, which returns the submission to the pool via rtio_sqe_pool_free() and, for streaming (multishot) submissions, also releases the RX buffer with rtio_release_buffer(). The second completion therefore reads a freed rtio_iodev_sqe, pushes the same mpsc node onto the submission queue while it is already on the pool free list — splicing the two lists together — and re-submits the freed request so the next measurement is written through an already-released buffer. For one-shot submissions it emits a spurious success completion carrying stale userdata and frees the same pool entry twice. The failure branch is driven by sensor conditions rather than by host software. The vendor API documents statuses such as ERROR_ARGUS_BIAS_VOLTAGE_REINIT and ERROR_ARGUS_LASER_MONITOR_INACTIVE as transient results of harsh ambient light, so a party in front of the optical sensor can provoke the invalid-data condition without any physical contact with the board or any software access; SPI transfer errors reach the same branch. In releases before the payload.Status check was dropped, ordinary sharp distance transitions in the sensor's field of view were sufficient. Impact is corruption of the RTIO submission pool and mempool bookkeeping: aliased submissions, writes through released buffers, and duplicate completions delivered to the application. The attacker does not control the corrupted content, so the practical consequence is memory corruption and loss of availability on devices that instantiate brcm,afbr-s50, rather than directed code execution. Only builds that enable this driver are affected.

Source: NVD (NIST), cvelistv5

Affected products

The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.

Affected products
		Affected versions	Fixed in
zephyrproject	zephyr	`4.3.0 – < 4.5.0`	`4.5.0`

Vendors and products

Zephyrproject Zephyrproject Zephyr

Weakness classes (CWE)

CWE-415Double Free
Variant
The product calls free() twice on the same memory address.
Entry at MITRE CWE-415

References & sources

github.comFix commitPatch
github.comGHSA-559f-34rc-pgw2

Changes to this CVE

Who changed this CVE and when: NVD (analysis, affected products, CVSS), the CVE publisher (CNA) and additional providers such as CISA (ADP).

23.10.2026Record modifiedCISA ADP

CISA assessment (SSVC): exploitation: none known, automatable: no

Show the original change

Individual changes of this event as published by NVD
Type	Action	Before	After
SSVC assessment	added	—	{"id":"CVE-2026-78116","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"no"},{"technicalImpact":"partial"}],"version":"2.0.3","timestamp":"2026-10-23T20:42:45.739972Z"}

Source identifier: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

21.10.2026Receivedzephyrproject.org

CVSS V3.1: AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H

Weakness type: CWE-415

Description added or changed

New references:

Show 6 original changes

Individual changes of this event as published by NVD
Type	Action	Before	After
Description	added	—	The Broadcom AFBR-S50 time-of-flight sensor driver double-completes an RTIO submission when sensor data evaluation fails. In data_ready_work_handler() (drivers/sensor/broadcom/afbr_s50/afbr_s50.c), a non-STATUS_OK return from Argus_EvaluateData() calls handle_error_on_result(), which finalises the request with rtio_iodev_sqe_err(), but execution then fell through to the tail of the function and finalised the very same struct rtio_iodev_sqe a second time with rtio_iodev_sqe_ok(). Unlike the other error branches in the same function, this one did not return. Both completion helpers reach rtio_executor_done() in subsys/rtio/rtio_executor.c, which returns the submission to the pool via rtio_sqe_pool_free() and, for streaming (multishot) submissions, also releases the RX buffer with rtio_release_buffer(). The second completion therefore reads a freed rtio_iodev_sqe, pushes the same mpsc node onto the submission queue while it is already on the pool free list — splicing the two lists together — and re-submits the freed request so the next measurement is written through an already-released buffer. For one-shot submissions it emits a spurious success completion carrying stale userdata and frees the same pool entry twice. The failure branch is driven by sensor conditions rather than by host software. The vendor API documents statuses such as ERROR_ARGUS_BIAS_VOLTAGE_REINIT and ERROR_ARGUS_LASER_MONITOR_INACTIVE as transient results of harsh ambient light, so a party in front of the optical sensor can provoke the invalid-data condition without any physical contact with the board or any software access; SPI transfer errors reach the same branch. In releases before the payload.Status check was dropped, ordinary sharp distance transitions in the sensor's field of view were sufficient. Impact is corruption of the RTIO submission pool and mempool bookkeeping: aliased submissions, writes through released buffers, and duplicate completions delivered to the application. The attacker does not control the corrupted content, so the practical consequence is memory corruption and loss of availability on devices that instantiate brcm,afbr-s50, rather than directed code execution. Only builds that enable this driver are affected.
CVSS	added	—	AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H
Weakness type (CWE)	added	—	CWE-415
Affected versions (publisher)	added	—	New affected value received. <a href="https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/blob/main/cves/2026/78xxx/CVE-2026-78116.json">CVE-2026-78116</a>
Reference	added	—	https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/commit/817e92c5184c0d64b8cc6537f4e42ce1e5b635f9
Reference	added	—	https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/security/advisories/GHSA-559f-34rc-pgw2

Source identifier: vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org

Embed badge

Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.

<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-78116"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-78116.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-78116 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>