CVE-2026-0138
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn lwis_io_buffer_write of lwis_io_buffer.c, there is a possible out of bounds write due to memory corruption. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceOut-of-bounds write vulnerability in lwis_io_buffer_write function within lwis_io_buffer.c. The function fails to properly validate buffer boundaries when writing data, leading to memory corruption that can be exploited for local privilege escalation from System privileges.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if lwis driver is present on the deviceSearch for lwis.ko module file in /system/lib/modules/, /vendor/lib/modules/, or /lib/modules/ directories using 'find / -name "lwis*" 2>/dev/null'Affected if The lwis driver module file exists on the device filesystem
-
Verify lwis driver is currently loadedExecute 'lsmod | grep lwis' or check 'cat /proc/modules' output for an lwis entryAffected if The lwis driver module is loaded and running in the kernel
-
Check for lwis device nodeList /dev/ for lwis character devices (e.g., /dev/lwis*) or examine /sys/class/ for lwis device entriesAffected if A lwis device node exists and is accessible, indicating the driver is active
-
Confirm Android OS versionRun 'getprop ro.build.version.release' or read /system/build.prop for ro.build.version.releaseAffected if Any Android version is running, as all versions are affected according to the advisory
-
Review kernel logs for lwis activityCheck dmesg output or /var/log/kmsg for lwis driver initialization messages using 'dmesg | grep -i lwis'Affected if Kernel logs show lwis driver has been initialized, confirming the vulnerable code path is active
The environment is affected if the lwis driver is present and loaded, regardless of Android version, since the out-of-bounds write flaw exists in the lwis_io_buffer_write function when the driver is enabled.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply vendor-provided kernel/driver patch for the lwis component; if unavailable, consider disabling the affected driver or updating to a kernel version containing the fix.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0138 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-0138 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data