CVE-2026-72854
Last modified
CVE-2026-72854 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 5.3/10 on the CVSS scale. msgpack_unpacker_expand_buffer in src/unpack.c, reached through the public msgpack_unpacker_reserve_buffer API, computes its new buffer size using an unchecked size_t addition of the requested size and the amount already used. The doubling loop guards its own multiplication against overflow, but the addition in the loop condition is unguarded, so a request near SIZE_MAX wraps: the loop condition is already satisfied, the allocation is performed at the small pre-wrap size, and the function returns true. EPSS estimates a 0.16% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
Description
msgpack_unpacker_expand_buffer in src/unpack.c, reached through the public msgpack_unpacker_reserve_buffer API, computes its new buffer size using an unchecked size_t addition of the requested size and the amount already used. The doubling loop guards its own multiplication against overflow, but the addition in the loop condition is unguarded, so a request near SIZE_MAX wraps: the loop condition is already satisfied, the allocation is performed at the small pre-wrap size, and the function returns true. The caller is told the requested capacity was reserved when it was not, so a subsequent write of the requested length overflows the heap buffer. The library's own example/lib_buffer_unpack.c demonstrates the reserve-then-write pattern, and its defensive assert comparing capacity against the request is compiled out under NDEBUG. msgpack-c's own decode entry points do not derive the reservation size from untrusted input, so reaching this requires an integration that passes an attacker-influenced length to the reservation API, such as a length-prefixed streaming transport.
Metrics
Weakness Enumeration
Affected Software
Source: CNA advisory (CVE.org). NVD analysis pending.
| Vendor | Product | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| msgpack | msgpack-c | <= 7.0.1 |
References
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Deferred
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-72854?
How severe is CVE-2026-72854?
How do I fix CVE-2026-72854?
How Strix Helps
- How Strix found a critical auth bypass in etcdStrix autonomously discovered a critical authentication bypass in etcd, later designated CVE-2026-33413.
- Autonomous PentestingAI agents that find and validate exploitable vulnerabilities like this one across your applications.
- PR ReviewsPentest every pull request so vulnerable code is caught before it ships to production.
- AI Penetration TestingHow AI-driven penetration testing continuously covers your attack surface.
Related CVEs from 2026
- CVE-2026-72848SitemapLoader.parse_sitemap in langchain_community/document_…8.6
- CVE-2026-72849Budibase before 3.40.0 contains a cross-site request forgery…7.7
- CVE-2026-72850Budibase before 3.40.0 fails to properly sanitize S3 object …9.1
- CVE-2026-72851Budibase before 3.40.0 contains an unauthenticated SQL injec…10
- CVE-2026-72852hank-ai/darknet sizes a convolutional layer's weight and out…7.8
- CVE-2026-72853Budibase before 3.40.0 contains a SQL injection vulnerabilit…7.6
- CVE-2026-72855Budibase before 3.40.0 contains server-side request forgery …8.5
- CVE-2026-72856Budibase versions before 3.40.0 contain an authorization/aut…8.1
- CVE-2026-72857Budibase before 3.40.0 fails to redact datasource credential…7.7
- CVE-2026-72858Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn …
- CVE-2026-72859Budibase versions 3.39.4 before 3.40.0 contain an authorizat…7.7
- CVE-2026-72860The POST /api/provider-nodes/validate route in 9router takes…8.5
Are you affected by CVE-2026-72854?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST
