Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-26074 is a high-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linuxfoundation Everest. Its CVSS base score is 7.0 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 4th 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-16 (Memory Protection) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16218
Vulnerability Data
EVerest is an EV charging software stack. Versions prior to 2026.02.0 have a data race leading to possible `std::map<std::queue>` corruption. The trigger is CSMS GetLog/UpdateFirmware request (network) with an EVSE fault event (physical). This results in TSAN reports concurrent access…
more
(data race) to `event_queue`. Version 2026.2.0 contains a patch.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Data race in network-exposed EV charging stack (triggered by CSMS requests) directly enables remote exploitation of public-facing application.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly addresses the unpatched data race by requiring timely application of the vendor fix in 2026.02.0 that eliminates concurrent access to event_queue.
Memory protection mechanisms can block or contain corruption of the std::map<std::queue> structures caused by the race between CSMS requests and EVSE events.
Integrity verification of executing software can detect unauthorized modification or corruption resulting from the CWE-362 race 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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
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 reduces introduction of concurrency bugs during updates, yet does not address the weakness itself.