CVE-2026-11404 — Cesanta Mongoose Out-of-Bounds Read in MG_TLS_BUILTIN ClientHello Session ID Parsing

Cesanta Mongoose before 7.22 contains an out-of-bounds read in the built-in TLS server function mg_tls_server_recv_hello(), which uses an attacker-controlled session_id_len byte from a TLS ClientHello as a buffer index without validating it against the length of received data. A remote, unauthenticated attacker can send a single crafted ClientHello with an oversized session id length to read past the receive buffer, crashing any HTTPS, MQTTS, or WSS service built on MG_TLS_BUILTIN.

Published Jul 9, 2026Updated Aug 29, 2026Sources: cvelistV5, VulnCheck

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

cesanta

mongoose

CVSS base

7.5

HIGH

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

cesanta

Products (1)

mongoose

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
7.5	CVSS 3.1	HIGH	—	—	cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-125

References

2 on the record

github.com/cesanta/mongoose/releases/tag/7.22
patch, release-notes
github.com/cesanta/mongoose
product

Elsewhere on this site

cesantaevery CVE for this vendor
CWE-125other 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.