Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-26071 is a medium-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linuxfoundation Everest. Its CVSS base score is 4.2 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 3th 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.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16205
Vulnerability Data
EVerest is an EV charging software stack. Versions prior to 2026.02.0 have a data race leading to `std::string` concurrent access. with heap-use-after-free possible. This is triggered by EVCCID update (EV/ISO15118) and OCPP session/authorization events. Version 2026.02.0 contains a patch.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
UAF data race in network-triggered OCPP/ISO15118 paths enables remote exploitation of public EV charging endpoints.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
- 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V10.4.2V10.4.5V15.1.3V15.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including dynamic analysis with race detectors) directly catches data races and use-after-free conditions before release.
Requires use of development standards and tools that enforce thread-safe coding and static/dynamic analysis for concurrent std::string access.
Memory protection mechanisms can mitigate exploitation of the resulting heap-use-after-free even if the race is triggered.
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 SDLC practices directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover use-after-free issues via scanning or analysis but do not prevent their introduction.
Routine patching removes known use-after-free instances after they have been introduced in released software.
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 can detect race conditions, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.