CVE-2026-19499
CVE-2026-19499 — Buffer overflow in strfmon and strfmon_l right-justification padding
Calling strfmon and strfmon_l in the GNU C Library version 2.38 to 2.44 can write past the end of the caller-supplied output buffer when a conversion uses right-justified width padding. Exploitation requires an application code path that calls strfmon or strfmon_l with right-justified width padding into a destination buffer that is large enough for the padding to succeed but too small for the internal memmove call. The field width or format may be attacker-influenced or a fixed susceptible pattern in the caller. At the time of publication, no network-facing application impact is known.
Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, glibc
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
0%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
CVSS base
7.7
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.
Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
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)
Products (1)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.7 | CVSS 3.1 | HIGH | — | — | cvelistV5 |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-122
References
2 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
- the gnu c libraryevery CVE for this vendor
- CWE-122other 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.