CVE-2026-31513

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

Bluetooth: L2CAP: Fix stack-out-of-bounds read in l2cap_ecred_conn_req

Syzbot reported a KASAN stack-out-of-bounds read in l2cap_build_cmd() that is triggered by a malformed Enhanced Credit Based Connection Request.

The vulnerability stems from l2cap_ecred_conn_req(). The function allocates a local stack buffer (pdu) designed to hold a maximum of 5 Source Channel IDs (SCIDs), totaling 18 bytes. When an attacker sends a request with more than 5 SCIDs, the function calculates rsp_len based on this unvalidated cmd_len before checking if the number of SCIDs exceeds L2CAP_ECRED_MAX_CID.

If the SCID count is too high, the function correctly jumps to the response label to reject the packet, but rsp_len retains the attackers oversized value. Consequently, l2cap_send_cmd() is instructed to read past the end of the 18-byte pdu buffer, triggering a KASAN panic.

Fix this by moving the assignment of rsp_len to after the num_scid boundary check. If the packet is rejected, rsp_len will safely remain 0, and the error response will only read the 8-byte base header from the stack.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Potential Mitigations

• Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
• When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
• Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
• To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/540.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5b35f8211a913cfe7ab9d54fa36a272d2059a588
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9d87cb22195b2c67405f5485d525190747ad5493
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a3d9c50d69785ae02e153f000da1b5fd6dbfdf1b
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c8e1a27edb8b4e5afb56b384acd7b6c2dec1b7cc