CVE-2026-27857
CVE-2026-27857 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Intelligence
Sending "NOOP (((...)))" command with 4000 parenthesis open+close results in ~1MB extra memory usage. Longer commands will result in client disconnection. This 1 MB can be left allocated for longer time periods by not sending the command ending LF. So attacker could connect possibly from even a single IP and create 1000 connections to allocate 1 GB of memory, which would likely result in reaching VSZ limit and killing the process and its other proxied connections. Attacker could connect possibly from even a single IP and create 1000 connections to allocate 1 GB of memory, which would likely result in reaching VSZ limit and killing the process and its other proxied connections. Install fixed version, there is no other remediation. No publicly available exploits are known.
Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, OX
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
1%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
CVSS base
4.3
MEDIUM
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 (2)
Products (18)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.3 | CVSS 3.1 | MEDIUM | — | — | cvelistV5 |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-400
- CWE-770
Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.
- T1499Endpoint Denial of Service
- T1498.001Network Denial of Service: Direct Network Flood
- T1499.003Endpoint Denial of Service: Application Exhaustion Flood
References
18 on the record
- documentation.open-xchange.com/dovecot/security/advisories/csaf/2026/oxdc-adv-2026-0001.json
vendor-advisory
- access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-27857
vdb-entry, x_refsource_REDHAT
- bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2452179
issue-tracking, x_refsource_REDHAT
- security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-27857.json
x_sadp-csaf-vex
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:26564
vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:17602
vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:13498
vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:19149
vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
Elsewhere on this site
- open xchangeevery CVE for this vendor
- redhatevery CVE for this vendor
- CWE-400other 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.