Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:L/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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-2026-29022 is a medium-severity Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-122) vulnerability in Mackron Dr Libs. Its CVSS base score is 6.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 11th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — 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-2026-29022 is a heap buffer overflow vulnerability affecting dr_libs' dr_wav.h component in versions 0.14.4 and earlier. The issue resides in the drwav__read_smpl_to_metadata_obj() function, where a mismatch between sampleLoopCount validation during the first pass and unconditional processing in the second pass enables memory corruption. This flaw can be triggered by processing crafted WAV files through any drwav_init_*_with_metadata() call on untrusted input, resulting in a heap overflow of 36 bytes of attacker-controlled data. It is associated with CWE-122 (Heap-based Buffer Overflow) and CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write), with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.3 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H).
An attacker with local access can exploit this vulnerability by supplying a malicious WAV file, requiring user interaction such as opening the file in an application that uses the affected dr_libs functions. No privileges are needed, and the attack complexity is low. Successful exploitation leads to memory corruption, potentially allowing limited confidentiality impact alongside high integrity and availability disruptions, such as code execution or denial of service within the context of the processing application.
Mitigation is available via the fixing commit 8a7258c in the dr_libs repository, which addresses the validation mismatch. Security advisories from Marlink Cyber (MCSAID-2026-001) and VulnCheck detail the heap overflow and recommend updating to the patched version. Additional technical discussion is provided in dr_libs GitHub issue #296.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-9315
Vulnerability Data
dr_libs dr_wav.h version 0.14.4 and earlier (fixed in commit 8a7258c) contain a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the drwav__read_smpl_to_metadata_obj() function of dr_wav.h that allows memory corruption via crafted WAV files. Attackers can exploit a mismatch between sampleLoopCount validation in pass…
more
1 and unconditional processing in pass 2 to overflow heap allocations with 36 bytes of attacker-controlled data through any drwav_init_*_with_metadata() call on untrusted input.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and memory-error detectors) can discover heap overflows after they have been coded.
Input validation enforces bounds checking on data written to heap buffers, directly stopping the overflow condition from being introduced.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Security engineering principles require use of memory-safe constructs and bounds-checked allocation routines that avoid introducing heap overflows.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability of a heap overflow to execute attacker-controlled code or corrupt adjacent structures.
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 directly require bounds checking and safe memory handling that prevent heap overflows.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover heap-overflow flaws but does not prevent their introduction in code.
Timely patching removes known heap-overflow instances after they exist.
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 can detect heap overflows before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates practices that reduce the likelihood of introducing heap overflows.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory APIs that mitigate heap overflows.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safety and input-validation controls that address heap overflows.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe techniques (safe functions, bounds checks) that prevent heap-based buffer overflows.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.