Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/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-2026-32860 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Ni Labview. Its CVSS base score is 8.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 13th 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.
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-2026-32860 is a memory corruption vulnerability stemming from an out-of-bounds write that occurs when NI LabVIEW loads a corrupted LVLIB file. This flaw affects NI LabVIEW 2026 Q1 (version 26.1.0) and all prior versions. Classified under CWE-787, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Exploitation requires an attacker to entice a user into opening a specially crafted .lvlib file within LabVIEW, making it a local attack vector with no privileges needed but user interaction mandatory. Successful exploitation could lead to information disclosure or arbitrary code execution on the victim's system.
NI has issued a security advisory detailing the LV project library file parsing issue, available at https://www.ni.com/en/support/security/available-critical-and-security-updates-for-ni-software/2026/lv-project-library-file-parsing-memory-corruption-vulnerability-in-ni-labview.html, which provides information on critical and security updates for mitigation.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-19899
Vulnerability Data
There is a memory corruption vulnerability due to an out-of-bounds write when loading a corrupted LVLIB file in NI LabVIEW. This vulnerability may result in information disclosure or arbitrary code execution. Successful exploitation requires an attacker to get a user…
more
to open a specially crafted .lvlib file. This vulnerability affects NI LabVIEW 2026 Q1 (26.1.0) and prior versions.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Input validation can structurally reject or sanitize data that would otherwise trigger an out-of-bounds write.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
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 (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software directly eliminates known instances of this coding weakness.
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 and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.
Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.
Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.