What is CVE-2026-57229?

CVE-2026-57229 is Suricata smtp/mime: incomplete state reset allows detection bypass. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Unclassified mapped to CWE-665 CWE-665.

Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-57229. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-57229 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-57229. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-57229 using CVSS 5.3, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

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. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

medium

CVE-2026-57229

CVE-2026-57229 — Suricata smtp/mime: incomplete state reset allows detection bypass

Suricata is a network Intrusion Detection System, Intrusion Prevention System and Network Security Monitoring engine. From 8.0.0 until 8.0.6, the SMTP MIME parser in rust/src/mime/smtp.rs does not fully reset state when processing Content-Type: message/rfc822 encapsulation. An outer MIME part's encoding or filename state can leak into the inner message, allowing crafted mail to evade detections based on file.data, file.name, or extracted URLs when SMTP MIME decoding is enabled. This issue is fixed in version 8.0.6.

Published Sep 18, 2026Updated Sep 18, 2026Sources: NVD, OISF (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

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

OISF

suricata

CVSS base

5.3

medium

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade suricata to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

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
OISF	suricata	>= 8.0.0, < 8.0.6	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

None

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

Low

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

None

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
5.3	CVSS 3.1	medium	3.9	1.4	GitHub (CNA), OISF (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

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.

MITRE

CWE-665 · Improper Initialization

Read Memory
Read Application Data
Bypass Protection Mechanism
DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Mitigation: Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, in Java, if the programmer does not explicitly initialize a variable, then the code could produce a compile-time error (if the variable is local) or automatically initialize the variable to the default value for the variable's type. In Perl, if explicit initialization is not performed, then a default value of undef is assigned, which is interpreted as 0, false, or an equivalent value depending on the context in which the variable is accessed.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-665

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-26 · Leveraging Race ConditionsCAPEC-29 · Leveraging Time-of-Check and Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Conditions

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 /src/mime/smtp.rs, /rfc822.
Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable suricata.

web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPS

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 5.3 (AV:N)
Sep 18, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Sep 18, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Sep 18, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

5 on the record

github.com/OISF/suricata/commit/4985eb9daea2f765b6ef59a58fa02e5c71c0a77c
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre
github.com/OISF/suricata/commit/c0215c7e175b0000ef8450928dd1f3453c48379b
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre
github.com/OISF/suricata/releases/tag/suricata-8.0.6
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre
github.com/OISF/suricata/security/advisories/GHSA-ph5p-pm8r-m355
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre
redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/8649
Vendor Advisory, Mitre

Elsewhere on this site

OISFevery CVE for this vendor
Unclassifiedsame class
CWE-665other 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-2026-57229 is Suricata smtp/mime: incomplete state reset allows detection bypass, a medium vulnerability affecting suricata from OISF. 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-2026-57229. Public exploit evidence is: A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-57229. 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 5.3 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.