Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.15% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-50719High confidence
Affected product: Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations
Unknown · Unknown
6.8MediumCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Fix not verifiedMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Unknown and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
The Ingenic T41, and probably also T32, T40, and A1 SoC boot ROMs parse and execute an attacker-controlled init table from the SPL header before checking the secure boot state and before invoking signature verification. The init table parser supports full-address 32-bit write operations, allowing modification of SRAM-resident secure boot state prior to the verification decision. An attacker with physical write access to boot media can inject an init-table entry that disables the secure boot check, causing the ROM to accept unsigned or modified first-stage boot code. This has been hardware-validated on a secureboot-enabled T41 device; ROM analysis confirms closely related behavior on T32, T40, and A1.
What
The Ingenic T41, and probably also T32, T40, and A1 SoC boot ROMs parse and execute an attacker-controlled init table from the SPL header before checking the secure boot state and before invoking signature verification. The init table parser supports full-address 32-bit write operations, allowing modification of SRAM-resident secure boot state prior to the verification decision. An attacker with physical write access to boot media can inject an init-table entry that disables the secure boot check, causing the ROM to accept unsigned or modified first-stage boot code. This has been hardware-validated on a secureboot-enabled T41 device; ROM analysis confirms closely related behavior on T32, T40, and A1.
Why
The code uses a function that has inconsistent implementations across operating systems and versions.
How
An attacker operating through physical access may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
The Ingenic T41, and probably also T32, T40, and A1 SoC boot ROMs parse and execute an attacker-controlled init table from the SPL header before checking the secure boot state and before invoking signature verification. The init table parser supports full-address 32-bit write operations, allowing modification of SRAM-resident secure boot state prior to the verification decision. An attacker with physical write access to boot media can inject an init-table entry that disables the secure boot check, causing the ROM to accept unsigned or modified first-stage boot code. This has been hardware-validated on a secureboot-enabled T41 device; ROM analysis confirms closely related behavior on T32, T40, and A1.
Why
The code uses a function that has inconsistent implementations across operating systems and versions.
How
An attacker operating through physical access may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- physical access → Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Physical
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-474 ↗
CWE-474: Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations. The code uses a function that has inconsistent implementations across operating systems and versions.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVPhysicalAttack vector: The attacker needs physical access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- n/a
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 19 Aug 2026 · Last source change 24 Aug 2026, 20:01 UTC · CWE-474 · Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCISA ADP
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-23
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-62479
Product sourceUnavailable
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCISA ADP
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- SeveritySeverity changed from Unknown to Medium.CISA ADP ↗
- Before
- Unknown
- After
- Medium
- CVSS scoreCVSS score changed from not recorded to 6.8 (CVSS 3.1 · CISA ADP · CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).CISA ADP ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- 6.8 (CVSS 3.1 · CISA ADP · CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H)
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.