Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-16225

Memory Safety

Published
19 July 2026
Modified
20 July 2026
CVSS Score v4 2.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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 0.0023 14th percentile
Risk Priority 15 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-16225 is a low-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 14th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A security flaw has been discovered in davenardella snap7 up to 1.4.3. The impacted element is the function TSnap7Peer::NegotiatePDULength of the file src/core/s7_peer.cpp. The manipulation of the argument PDULength results in out-of-bounds write. The attack can be executed remotely. The…

more

exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Why these techniques?

Remote out-of-bounds write in network-facing S7 library directly enables remote exploitation of public-facing applications.

Confidence: MEDIUM · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-10114Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2026-13592Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2026-15545Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2026-3703Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2026-2940Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2026-16095Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2025-0568Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2025-0569Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2025-8159Shared CWE-119, CWE-787
CVE-2026-4211Shared CWE-119, CWE-787

Affected Assets

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V17.3.2

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

addresses: CWE-119 CWE-787

Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.

addresses: CWE-119

Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.

addresses: CWE-119

Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.

addresses: CWE-119

Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.

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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.

ID.RA-08 partial match
prevents

Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.

PR.AT-02 partial match
prevents

Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.

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.

detects

Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.

prevents

Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.

prevents

Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.

References