Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-0954 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Ni Dasylab. Its CVSS base score is 8.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 10th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-0954 is a memory corruption vulnerability stemming from an out-of-bounds write that occurs when Digilent DASYLab loads a corrupted DSB file. This flaw affects all versions of Digilent DASYLab and is classified under CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write). The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating high impact potential on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Exploitation requires an attacker to entice a user into opening a specially crafted .DSB file within Digilent DASYLab. As a local attack vector with no privileges needed but user interaction required, it can lead to information disclosure or arbitrary code execution on the affected system.
The National Instruments (NI) security advisory at https://www.ni.com/en/support/security/available-critical-and-security-updates-for-ni-software/2026/out-of-bounds-write-vulnerabilities-in-digilent-dasylab.html details this out-of-bounds write vulnerability in Digilent DASYLab and provides information on available critical and security updates.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-12035
Vulnerability Data
There is a memory corruption vulnerability due to an out-of-bounds write when loading a corrupted DSB file in Digilent DASYLab. This vulnerability may result in information disclosure or arbitrary code execution. Successful exploitation requires an attacker to get a user…
more
to open a specially crafted .DSB file. This vulnerability affects all versions of Digilent DASYLab.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Input validation can structurally reject or sanitize data that would otherwise trigger an out-of-bounds write.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure-development practices (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software directly eliminates known instances of this coding weakness.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.
Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.
Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.