Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-16439

Memory Safety in Eclipse Openj9 0.8.0 – 0.60.0

Published
21 July 2026
Modified
11 August 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 5.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:L/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 0.0024 15th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-16439 is a medium-severity Buffer Underflow (CWE-124) vulnerability in Eclipse Openj9. Its CVSS base score is 5.8 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 15th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In Eclipse OpenJ9 versions up to 0.60, using -Xtrace to trace method arguments can lead to buffer underflow.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
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.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-4447Same product: Eclipse Openj9
CVE-2026-6918Same product: Eclipse Openj9
CVE-2023-2597Same product: Eclipse Openj9
CVE-2024-10917Same product: Eclipse Openj9
CVE-2024-3933Same product: Eclipse Openj9
CVE-2023-5676Same product: Eclipse Openj9
CVE-2025-2259Same vendor: Eclipse
CVE-2025-55078Same vendor: Eclipse
CVE-2023-48694Same vendor: Eclipse
CVE-2025-55080Same vendor: Eclipse

Affected Assets

eclipse
openj9
0.8.0 — 0.60.0

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)
  • V1.4.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and analysis can discover buffer underwrite flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.

Input validation can enforce bounds on indices or pointers before buffer writes, structurally stopping underwrite conditions.

Memory protection mechanisms limit the blast radius of an out-of-bounds write even if the coding flaw exists.

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 prevent introduction of buffer underwrite flaws via coding standards, reviews, and testing.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes can discover buffer underwrite issues but do not prevent their creation.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching removes instances of the weakness after discovery but does not address root-cause prevention in code.

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 catches buffer-underflow defects before release.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent buffer underflow.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and pointer-safety rules.

prevents

Secure architecture and engineering principles require safe memory-handling patterns.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds checks.

References