CVE-2026-2411
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 · uneditedZephyr's Bluetooth host declares a GATT characteristic as two consecutive attributes: a Characteristic Declaration whose permission is hard-coded to BT_GATT_PERM_READ, and a Characteristic Value attribute that carries the application-specified security permissions (e.g. BT_GATT_PERM_READ_ENCRYPT / READ_AUTHEN / READ_LESC). The public notify and indicate APIs explicitly accept either attribute, and passing the declaration is the documented, common idiom. Before sending each notification or indication, the host re-checks link security with bt_gatt_check_perm() against params->attr in gatt_notify(), gatt_indicate(), and gatt_notify_multiple_verify_params() (subsys/bluetooth/host/gatt.c). When the application passed the Characteristic Declaration attribute, the host correctly redirected the value handle but left params->attr pointing at the declaration, so the security check evaluated the declaration's permissions (no security required) instead of the value's. As a result the encryption/authentication/LESC requirement configured on the characteristic value was skipped. The Notify-Multiple path additionally used a mask that omitted the LE Secure Connections requirement. A remote peer triggers the disclosure by connecting (optionally without pairing or encryption) and writing the Client Characteristic Configuration descriptor to enable notifications or indications, causing the server to emit the protected value over a link that has not reached the required security level. The impact is information disclosure / access-control bypass for characteristic values the application intended to expose only over a secured link; exposure depends on the application declaring encrypt/authen-required notify/indicate characteristics and on the CCC being writable at a lower security tier. There is no memory-safety or availability impact. The fix adds bt_gatt_attr_resolve_value(), which maps a declaration attribute to the following value attribute before the permission check, and switches the Notify-Multiple path to the full BT_GATT_PERM_READ_ENCRYPT_MASK so the LESC requirement is also enforced.
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 analysisAn authorization check exists but is flawed, so it passes when it should fail. Attackers probe roles and object references to find the gap. Remediation means centralising and correctly implementing the access-control logic, then testing it against every role.
General guidance for the incorrect authorization class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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 data>= 2.6.0, < 4.5.0CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 data4.5.0
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-2411 — 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-2026-2411 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