GHSA-F38W-MWF7-VV8P

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-30 15:30 – Updated: 2026-06-30 15:30
VLAI
Details

In hostapd before 2.12, a missing bounds check in AP-mode Wi-Fi 7 (IEEE 802.11be) Multi-Link Operation (MLO) association request processing allows an unauthenticated attacker within wireless range to send a crafted management frame containing a malformed Multi-Link Element or Per-STA Profile subelement. In hostapd_process_ml_assoc_req() in src/ap/ieee802_11_eht.c, the received link_id field can be parsed as value 15, but the corresponding links[] storage only has valid entries for lower link IDs (0 through 14). This causes an out-of-bounds write / small memory corruption during association processing before the 4-way handshake. The attack does not require network credentials, prior authentication, or user interaction. The confirmed practical impact is denial of service through hostapd process termination. This affects hostapd v2.11 and newer development snapshots before v2.12 when built with CONFIG_IEEE80211BE enabled. The issue is fixed in hostapd v2.12 and the upstream 2026-1 fixes.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-58374"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-193"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-30T13:19:18Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In hostapd before 2.12, a missing bounds check in AP-mode Wi-Fi 7 (IEEE 802.11be) Multi-Link Operation (MLO) association request processing allows an unauthenticated attacker within wireless range to send a crafted management frame containing a malformed Multi-Link Element or Per-STA Profile subelement. In hostapd_process_ml_assoc_req() in src/ap/ieee802_11_eht.c, the received link_id field can be parsed as value 15, but the corresponding links[] storage only has valid entries for lower link IDs (0 through 14). This causes an out-of-bounds write / small memory corruption during association processing before the 4-way handshake. The attack does not require network credentials, prior authentication, or user interaction. The confirmed practical impact is denial of service through hostapd process termination. This affects hostapd v2.11 and newer development snapshots before v2.12 when built with CONFIG_IEEE80211BE enabled. The issue is fixed in hostapd v2.12 and the upstream 2026-1 fixes.",
  "id": "GHSA-f38w-mwf7-vv8p",
  "modified": "2026-06-30T15:30:45Z",
  "published": "2026-06-30T15:30:45Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-58374"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.w1.fi/cgit/hostap/commit/?id=46dd5a4ffc9bcf44cf8fc45120b3e1e5ec922187"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.w1.fi/cgit/hostap/commit/?id=aa9d345887389a251c63a3781d2ad2940d079193"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://w1.fi/security/2026-1"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://w1.fi/security/2026-1/missing-ml-parsing-validation.txt"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/06/30/1"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…