CVE-2026-2704
Memory Safety in Openbabel Open Babel ≤ 3.1.1
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-2704 is a low-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Openbabel Open Babel. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-2704 is an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in Open Babel versions up to and including 3.1.1. The issue affects the OpenBabel::transform3d::DescribeAsString function within the src/math/transform3d.cpp file, part of the CIF File Handler component. This flaw, linked to CWE-119 (Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer) and CWE-125 (Out-of-bounds Read), was published on 2026-02-19 and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 4.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L).
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely by unauthenticated attackers with network access who trick a user into processing a malicious CIF file, as it requires user interaction but no privileges. Successful exploitation results in a low-impact denial of service, such as application crashes due to the out-of-bounds read, with no confidentiality or integrity impacts.
Mitigation is available via the patch commit e23a224b8fd9d7c2a7cde9ef4ec6afb4c05aa08a on the Open Babel GitHub repository. A proof-of-concept exploit in the form of a repro.cif file has been publicly disclosed, along with the originating issue report at openbabel/openbabel#2848 and a related pull request at openbabel/openbabel#2862. The project was notified early but has not yet responded. Security practitioners should apply the patch promptly and avoid processing untrusted CIF files in affected versions. Additional details are available at vuldb.com/?ctiid.346650.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-7428
Vulnerability Data
A security vulnerability has been detected in Open Babel up to 3.1.1. The affected element is the function OpenBabel::transform3d::DescribeAsString of the file src/math/transform3d.cpp of the component CIF File Handler. The manipulation leads to out-of-bounds read. It is possible to initiate…
more
the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. Upgrading to version 3.2.0 is sufficient to fix this issue. The identifier of the patch is e23a224b8fd9d7c2a7cde9ef4ec6afb4c05aa08a. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation directly enforces bounds checking that stops out-of-bounds reads/writes from being introduced or reached.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
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 catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.