Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-2443 is a medium-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 35th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SC-7 (Boundary Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-6175
Vulnerability Data
A flaw was identified in libsoup, a widely used HTTP library in GNOME-based systems. When processing specially crafted HTTP Range headers, the library may improperly validate requested byte ranges. In certain build configurations, this could allow a remote attacker to…
more
access portions of server memory beyond the intended response. Exploitation requires a vulnerable configuration and access to a server using the embedded SoupServer component.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Out-of-bounds read via crafted Range headers on public SoupServer HTTP endpoint directly enables remote exploitation of a public-facing application for memory disclosure.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires validation of HTTP Range header inputs to block out-of-bounds memory reads (CWE-125) in SoupServer.
Memory protection mechanisms can prevent or contain unauthorized reads beyond intended response buffers when Range validation fails.
Boundary protection at the HTTP interface can restrict malformed Range requests from reaching the vulnerable libsoup component.
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 such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.