Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-20124

Published
05 August 2026
Modified
06 August 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 7.7
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0034 27th percentile
Risk Priority 54 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-20124 is a high-severity Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime (CWE-772) vulnerability in Cisco IOS XE (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 27th 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

A vulnerability in the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) subsystem of Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to cause an affected device to reload, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. This vulnerability is due…

more

to improper error handling when parsing SNMP requests. This vulnerability affects all versions of SNMP — Versions 1, 2c, and 3. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a malformed SNMP request to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause the device to reload unexpectedly. The attacker must have the SNMPv1 or v2c read-only or read-write community string or valid SNMPv3 user credentials on the affected device.

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.
T1499.002 Service Exhaustion Flood Impact
Adversaries may target the different network services provided by systems to conduct a denial of service (DoS).
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-39455Shared CWE-772
CVE-2025-36128Shared CWE-772
CVE-2026-9156Shared CWE-772
CVE-2023-53152Shared CWE-772
CVE-2023-45814Shared CWE-772
CVE-2025-44003Shared CWE-772
CVE-2023-31274Shared CWE-772
CVE-2026-23219Shared CWE-772
CVE-2025-24120Shared CWE-772
CVE-2026-53251Shared CWE-772

Affected Assets

Cisco
IOS XE
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing resource releases through dynamic analysis or stress testing.

Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate explicit resource-release patterns in code.

Resource-quota allocation limits the blast radius of an unreleased-resource exhaustion condition.

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.

ID.AM-08 mostly match
prevents

Lifecycle management explicitly requires handling resources through end-of-life including release.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly prevent missing resource-release defects during development.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring may surface resource-exhaustion symptoms but does not address release logic.

PR.IR-04 partial match
prevents

Capacity monitoring can detect exhaustion caused by unreleased resources but does not prevent the root defect.

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.

degrades

Explicit information-deletion requirements directly address timely release of resources after use.

prevents

Secure-SDLC practices include resource-management reviews, yet the control covers the entire lifecycle, not just this weakness.

prevents

Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit resource-release patterns, but the control is broader than this single weakness.

detects

Change-management processes may catch missing de-allocation during reviews, but the control itself does not target resource lifetime.

References