CVE-2026-41429
CVE-2026-41429 — Improper validation of NBNS name_len in arduino-esp32 NetBIOS leads to memory corruption
arduino-esp32 is an Arduino core for the ESP32, ESP32-S2, ESP32-S3, ESP32-C3, ESP32-C6 and ESP32-H2 microcontrollers. Prior to 3.3.8, there is a remotely reachable memory corruption issue in the NBNS packet handling path. When NetBIOS is enabled by calling NBNS.begin(...), the device listens on UDP port 137 and processes untrusted NBNS requests from the local network. The request parser trusts the attacker-controlled name_len field without enforcing a bound consistent with the fixed-size destination buffers used later in the flow. This vulnerability is fixed in 3.3.8.
Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M
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
8.8
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
PoC
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.1 | HIGH | — | — | cvelistV5 |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-121
References
1 on the record
- github.com/espressif/arduino-esp32/security/advisories/GHSA-92j9-c75g-2c5f
x_refsource_CONFIRM
Elsewhere on this site
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.