CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUMpublic exploit

CVE-2026-5950

CVE-2026-5950 — Unbounded resend loop in BIND 9 resolver

An unbounded resend loop vulnerability exists in the BIND 9 resolver state machine during bad-server handling, enabling a remote unauthenticated attacker to cause severe resource exhaustion by sending queries that trigger specific retry conditions. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.36 through 9.18.48, 9.20.8 through 9.20.22, 9.21.7 through 9.21.21, 9.18.36-S1 through 9.18.48-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.22-S1.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, isc

Triage

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

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

1%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

isc

bind_9

CVSS base

5.3

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.

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)

isc

Products (1)

bind 9

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
5.3CVSS 3.1MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-606

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Indexed by

poc in github

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • iscevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-606other 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.