CVE-2026-16662mcu-tools mcuboot use of uninitialized variable
CVE-2026-16662 is a use of uninitialized variable in mcu-tools mcuboot, rated low (2.4 on CVSS 3.1).
Why this priority: Low severity, with no exploitation signal.
Published · Updated · NVD status: Received
What it is
A variable is read before it is set, so leftover memory decides what happens.
How it is reached
An attacker can exploit it with physical access to the device, without an account, and nobody has to click anything.
What an attacker gains
The direct impact is limited: partial access to data or a partial outage. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker crash the process, read memory, or in the worst case run code.
Is it being exploited?
There is no public report of exploitation yet.
What to do
- Upgrade mcu-tools mcuboot to 2.5.0 or later.
Description from NVD
boot_save_boot_status() in boot/bootutil/src/boot_record.c reads the image's EXPECTED_HASH_TLV into a stack buffer image_hash[IMAGE_HASH_SIZE] that is never zero-initialised. The TLV handler validates only the upper bound (len > sizeof(image_hash)) and then reads exactly len bytes, so a TLV shorter than IMAGE_HASH_SIZE leaves the tail of image_hash holding stale stack content. The subsequent copy into the boot record, memcpy(buf + offset, image_hash, sizeof(image_hash)), uses the fixed buffer size rather than len, so up to IMAGE_HASH_SIZE - 1 bytes of uninitialised bootloader stack are written into the measured-boot record.
The defect is reachable only under MCUBOOT_MEASURED_BOOT, and only when the image reaching boot_save_boot_status() was not hash-validated on that boot. bootutil_img_validate() rejects a hash TLV whose length is not exactly sizeof(hash) (boot/bootutil/src/image_validate.c:345), and primary-slot validation is on by default (Zephyr's CONFIG_BOOT_VALIDATE_SLOT0 defaults to y), so in a default build the malformed image never reaches this code. The direct-XIP and RAM-load strategies in boot/bootutil/src/loader.c validate the selected slot unconditionally and are not affected. The short TLV survives only where the integrator has turned primary-slot validation off: the swap and overwrite loader built without MCUBOOT_VALIDATE_PRIMARY_SLOT, which checks only the image magic before calling boot_add_shared_data(), and the Zephyr single-slot loader (boot/zephyr/single_loader.c) built without it, including the MCUBOOT_VALIDATE_PRIMARY_SLOT_ONCE variant, which skips validation once the trailer records an earlier successful one. It is also reachable through a time-of-check/time-of-use change to tamperable external flash between validation and the boot-record read. Placing the crafted image requires physical or flash-write access to the device; in a single-slot build with serial recovery enabled, the serial-recovery upload writes the primary slot directly and can place it as well.
In these configurations the boot record's measurement is already not trustworthy: with validation off, the hash copied into the record is the image's own unverified EXPECTED_HASH_TLV, which the attacker chooses. The defect therefore does not weaken attestation integrity any further. What it adds is a path for bootloader memory to leave the device: up to 63 bytes (IMAGE_HASH_SIZE - 1) of uninitialised bootloader stack are embedded in the measurement field that a downstream attestation service sends to a remote verifier. In the configurations analysed the residue is bootloader internal state (TLV offsets and lengths, flash addresses, loop state), not key material, but what occupies that stack region depends on configuration and on which code ran before boot_save_boot_status(). It is reported as a low-severity, defense-in-depth disclosure with no integrity or availability impact.
This is distinct from the already-fixed record_len integer underflow in the same routine (GHSA-8hrv-4cp5-4rg3). The fix rejects any EXPECTED_HASH_TLV whose length is not exactly IMAGE_HASH_SIZE.
What this means for your architecture.
A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.
Components it touches
- Native code: operating systems, browsers and firmware. The flaw sits wherever native code reads untrusted data.
- Network appliances and media or file parsers. The flaw sits wherever native code reads untrusted data.
Trust boundaries in play
- Host boundary. The attacker needs a foothold on the machine first; the flaw turns a small foothold into a bigger one.
- Wherever native code reads untrusted data. An attacker who crosses it can crash the process, read memory, or in the worst case run code.
Questions to answer about your own systems
- Where does mcu-tools mcuboot run in your systems, and at which version?
- Which of those devices sit where outsiders can touch them?
- What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?
Sources
- CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
- Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
- Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
- Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.