Home/CVE/Expected behavior violation in the in-vehicle network of the Indian Motorcycle Scout Bobber + Tech 2025 model year allow
CVE
CVE-2026-49316
Expected behavior violation in the in-vehicle network of the Indian Motorcycle Scout Bobber + Tech 2025 model year allow
Expected behavior violation in the in-vehicle network of the Indian Motorcycle Scout Bobber + Tech 2025 model year allows an adjacent-network attacker to bypass the motorcycle's anti-theft shutdown by forcing the Wireless Control Module (WCM) into the CAN bus-off state. Using a well-known CAN error-frame injection technique against a periodic WCM transmission, the attacker drives the WCM CAN controller's transmit error counter past the bus-off threshold, after which the WCM stops transmitting all messages, including the shutdown command. Peer ECUs do not interpret WCM silence as a security event and continue normal operation, allowing the motorcycle to be operated despite the immobilizer never having been unlocked.
Specific protocol details have been withheld pending vendor remediation.
MEDIUM · CVSS 4.6
EPSS 0.00035
Monitor
- No active-exploitation, high-EPSS, or public-exploit signals - routine patching cadence
Sigma rules0
YARA rules0
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
▸
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-49316, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked.
EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal.
CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score.
Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits.
PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).
◆
ATT&CK techniques
7Techniques this CVE enables - linked via CWECAPECATT&CK. High◆ = named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei templates.
T1040 · Network Sniffing T1083 · File and Directory Discovery T1200 · Hardware Additions T1565.002 · Transmitted Data Manipulation T1574.005 · Executable Installer File Permissions Weakness T1574.010 · Services File Permissions Weakness T1611 · Escape to Host
▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques
▤
CAPEC attack patterns
12Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.
CAPEC-CAPEC-1 · Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs CAPEC-CAPEC-107 · Cross Site Tracing CAPEC-CAPEC-127 · Directory Indexing CAPEC-CAPEC-17 · Using Malicious Files CAPEC-CAPEC-20 · Encryption Brute Forcing CAPEC-CAPEC-22 · Exploiting Trust in Client CAPEC-CAPEC-237 · Escaping a Sandbox by Calling Code in Another Language CAPEC-CAPEC-36 · Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality CAPEC-CAPEC-477 · Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content CAPEC-CAPEC-480 · Escaping Virtualization CAPEC-CAPEC-51 · Poison Web Service Registry CAPEC-CAPEC-57 · Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data
⬡
Weakness Classification
▣
Scoring & Timeline
4.6
MEDIUM · CVSS v3.1 · [email protected]
Attack Vector
Network
Adjacent
Local
Physical
Attack Complexity
Low
High
Privileges Required
None
Low
High
User Interaction
None
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Low
High
Integrity
None
Low
High
Availability
None
Low
High
SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment
Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial
SSVC asks the questions that actually drive patch urgency: is it being exploited, can attacks be automated, and how total is the impact.
🔗
References & Sources
1Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.