CVE-2026-0799
CVE-2026-0799 — OOBR and OOBW in libpcap before 1.10.7
In BPF instructions that load/store a value from/to a scratch memory register the register index is an unsigned 32-bit integer and must not exceed 15, but libpcap BPF interpreter does not validate the value. In particular uncommon use cases a crafted filter program can cause the interpreter to try reading and writing the OS process memory in the 16GiB starting at the current stack frame on 64-bit architectures and in the entire address space on 32-bit architectures.
Published Updated Sources: NVD, The Tcpdump Group (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Exploit code
public exploit, none observed
EPSS
0%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs
CVSS base
8.7
high
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade to libpcap 1.10.7.
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.
- Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
- Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Tcpdump Group | libpcap | 0 to < 1.10.7 | Vulnerable |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Availability
High
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
High
Scope
Changed
Attack Complexity
Low
Attack Vector
Local
Privileges Req
Low
User Interaction
None
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.7 | CVSS 3.1 | high | 2 | 6 | tcpdump.org (CNA), The Tcpdump Group (CNA) |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:H
What this weakness leads to
MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.
CWE-129 · Improper Validation of Array Index
- DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
- Modify Memory
- Read Memory
- Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Mitigation: Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
CWE-787 · Out-of-bounds Write
- Modify Memory
- DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
- Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands::
Mitigation: Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-129
- CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read
- CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write
Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.
Public exploit
Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.
Repositories
6
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.
- Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /store, /to.
- Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 6 public PoC repositories were reported.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.
- 2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 8.7 (AV:L)
Sep 5, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Sep 5, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Sep 5, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
References
1 on the record
- github.com/the-tcpdump-group/libpcap/commit/48e8960a7108e9e828f9d7bdc7e97bdab841aec7
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
Elsewhere on this site
- The Tcpdump Groupevery CVE for this vendor
- Memory Corruptionsame class
- CWE-129other pages naming this weakness
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-0799 is OOBR and OOBW in libpcap before 1.10.7, a high vulnerability affecting libpcap from The Tcpdump Group. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-0799. Public exploit evidence is: 6 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 8.7 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.