CVE-2026-24074 in Snapdragon Compute
Summary
by MITRE • 09/17/2026
Memory Corruption when processing data with large offset and length values exceeds buffer limits during data copy operations.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/17/2026
The vulnerability described constitutes a classic memory corruption flaw arising from insufficient validation of input parameters during data manipulation routines, specifically within functions that handle offsets and lengths for copying or accessing buffers. This type of defect typically manifests when an application processes external or internal data structures containing large offset and length values without performing rigorous bounds checking against the actual allocated size of the target buffer. When these unchecked values are used to calculate memory addresses or determine copy sizes, they can exceed the boundaries of the intended memory region, leading to out-of-bounds reads or writes. This scenario is a direct implementation error where the developer fails to ensure that the sum of the offset and length does not surpass the total size of the buffer, nor do they verify that the starting index itself remains within valid limits before initiating any data transfer operation.
From a technical perspective, this flaw aligns with CWE-120 Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input Classic Buffer Overflow or CWE-787 Out-of-bounds Write depending on whether the operation results in overwriting adjacent memory structures or merely reading sensitive information from unintended locations. The root cause lies in the lack of defensive programming practices where input sanitization is not applied to numeric fields derived from untrusted sources. In many cases, these offset and length values may originate from network packets, file inputs, or API calls that are parsed without adequate validation logic. If an attacker can control these parameters, they can craft malicious payloads designed to trigger the overflow condition, potentially allowing them to overwrite critical memory structures such as return addresses, function pointers, or heap metadata fields like size descriptors in dynamic allocators.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is severe and multifaceted, ranging from application crashes due to segmentation faults to arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the affected process. In environments where network services are involved, remote attackers can exploit this flaw to achieve full system compromise by carefully crafting payloads that overwrite control flow data while simultaneously injecting shellcode or leveraging return-oriented programming techniques to bypass modern mitigations like ASLR and DEP. Even if immediate exploitation for code execution is not feasible due to stack randomization or other protections, the vulnerability still poses a significant risk of denial-of-service conditions through application instability and potential information disclosure by reading sensitive memory contents that lie beyond the intended buffer boundaries.
Mitigation strategies must focus on implementing robust input validation mechanisms at all entry points where such parameters are accepted. Developers should enforce strict upper bounds checks ensuring that both the offset and length values, as well their sum, do not exceed the allocated size of the target buffer before any copy operation is initiated. Utilizing safe string handling libraries or memory management functions that perform automatic boundary checking can significantly reduce the risk of this class of vulnerabilities. Additionally, enabling compiler-based security features such as stack protectors, address space layout randomization, and data execution prevention provides essential layers of defense in depth. Regular static analysis scanning using tools configured to detect CWE-120 or CWE-787 patterns during the software development lifecycle can help identify these flaws early, while dynamic testing with fuzzing techniques targeting offset and length fields is recommended to uncover edge cases that may have been missed during manual code review.