Is there a public exploit for CVE-2026-82961?

No public exploit for CVE-2026-82961 was found in Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei templates or public proof-of-concept repositories. That is an absence of evidence rather than proof that none exists.

How severe is CVE-2026-82961?

CVE-2026-82961 scores CVSS 7.8 (v3.1), rated high.

7.8 High

The GPIO syscall handlers in drivers/gpio/gpiohandlers.c did not validate the pin argument supplied by a user-mode caller.

CVE-2026-82961

The GPIO syscall handlers in drivers/gpio/gpiohandlers.c did not validate the pin argument supplied by a user-mode caller. zvrfygpiopinconfigure(), zvrfygpiopingetconfig() and zvrfygpiopininterruptconfigure() verified only the device object (KSYSCALLDRIVERGPIO() / KSYSCALLOBJ()) and then passed the caller-supplied gpiopint straight through to zimplgpiopin() and on to the driver. The only pin check in include/zephyr/drivers/gpio.h was ASSERT(gpioportpinissupported(cfg->portpinmask, pin), ...), which compiles to nothing unless CONFIGASSERT is enabled, so in a production build no check existed at all. GPIO drivers use pin as a shift count and as an array index on the documented assumption that it is a pin the controller supports. On STM32, for example, gpiostm32pininterruptconfigure() turns pin into an EXTI line and stm32gpiointcsetirqcallback() writes data->cb[linenum].cb and data->cb[linenum].data into a NUMEXTILINES-entry array (default 16) in drivers/interruptcontroller/intcgpiostm32.c, guarded only by a compiled-out ASSERTNOMSG(); the same function then reads extiirqtable[linenum] and calls irqenable() on the result. Other controllers index fixed-size per-pin configuration…

Assessment

CVSS: 7.8 (v3.1)
Severity: High
Known exploited: Not listed in CISA KEV
Exploit availability: Nothing found in Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or public PoC repositories
Published: 28 October 2026
Last updated: 4 November 2026
Weakness: CWE-787
Assigner: vulnerabilities@zephyrproject.org

CVSS vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

At the source

References

Community proofs of concept

No community proof of concept yet. If you have one for a published vulnerability and the right to share it, add it below — it will appear here once reviewed.

Submit a proof of concept

Only for publicly disclosed vulnerabilities, and only material from testing you were authorised to perform. This platform does not buy, sell, or broker exploits — see earning from vulnerability research for legitimate bounty programs. Submissions are reviewed before they appear. Text only; do not include live credentials, personal data, or anything targeting systems you are not permitted to test.

Title *

Proof of concept *

Write-up (optional)

Affected versions (optional)

Name or handle (optional)

References (optional, one URL per line)

Licence for your contribution *

Private contact (optional, never shown)

Before you submit * This vulnerability is already publicly disclosed (it has a published CVE). This material comes only from testing I was authorised to perform. I have the legal right to publish this content and am not breaching any agreement by doing so. It contains no live credentials, personal data, or anything targeting systems I am not authorised to test. I understand it will be reviewed before it appears publicly and may be rejected. I agree to the submission terms.

What is 6 + 4? *

Query this programmatically

Agents can read this through the MCP endpoint, or over HTTP:

curl https://cve.zerocrew.in/api/cve/CVE-2026-82961