Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-13474

Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller ≤ 13.1-37.272

Published
30 June 2026
Modified
02 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 8.7
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/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:X
EPSS Score 0.0047 39th percentile
Risk Priority 45 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-13474 is a high-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 39th 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.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Denial of service via malformed HTTP/2 requests in NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway if HTTP/2 is enabled in HTTP Profile and associated with the virtual server (of type LB, CS, VPN) or the service configured on NetScaler

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
T1499.003 Application Exhaustion Flood Impact
Adversaries may target resource intensive features of applications to cause a denial of service (DoS), denying availability to those applications.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-5349Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2025-7776Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2025-7775Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2023-6548Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2024-8534Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2025-6543Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2026-3055Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2023-4966Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2023-3519Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller
CVE-2026-10816Same product: Citrix Netscaler Application Delivery Controller

Affected Assets

citrix
netscaler application delivery controller
14.1-66.68 · ≤ 13.1-37.272 · ≤ 13.1-37.272 · 13.1 — 13.1-63.18
citrix
netscaler gateway
13.1 — 13.1-63.18 · 14.1 — 14.1-72.61

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.

Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.

Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.

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.

finds

Security testing in development can detect unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.

finds

Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.

References