CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2026-64647

CVE-2026-64647 — Next.js: Response Body Cache Confusion with Invalid UTF-8 Request Bodies

Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. In versions 12.0.0 through 15.5.20 and 16.0.0 through 16.2.10, a server-side fetch with a request body may return a cached response body from a different request to the same URL but different body. Confidential data in the POST's response body would then leak to unauthorized requests. Though the request itself will not be deduped. This is only an issue when receiving request bodies with a content type charset other than UTF-8. For example, the UTF-16 byte sequences for 삃삃 and 섄섄 in the request body would share the same cache. This issue has been fixed in versions 15.5.21 and 16.2.11.

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

Affects

vercel

next_js

CVSS base

6.3

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

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)

vercel

Products (1)

next js

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
6.3CVSS 4.0MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-116

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • vercelevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-116other 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.