Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-33845 is a high-severity Wrap or Wraparound (CWE-191) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 46% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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-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-2026-33845 is a vulnerability in the GnuTLS library's DTLS handshake parsing mechanism. The flaw enables the processing of malformed fragments that have zero length but a non-zero offset, triggering an integer underflow (CWE-191) during reassembly and resulting in an out-of-bounds read. This issue affects GnuTLS implementations that handle DTLS traffic.
The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H), indicating network-based exploitation with low complexity, no privileges or user interaction required. Unauthenticated remote attackers can send crafted DTLS handshake packets to vulnerable GnuTLS instances, potentially causing information disclosure or denial of service through the out-of-bounds read.
Red Hat has documented the issue in security advisories and provides related details in their CVE page at https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-33845 and Bugzilla tracker at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2450624, where mitigation guidance such as patches or workarounds may be available.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-26392
Vulnerability Data
A flaw in GnuTLS DTLS handshake parsing allows malformed fragments with zero length and non-zero offset, leading to an integer underflow during reassembly and resulting in an out-of-bounds read. This issue is remotely exploitable and may cause information disclosure or…
more
denial of service.
- 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 static/dynamic analysis directly find integer underflow defects before code is released.
Security engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer underflow during subtraction.
Input validation can reject or sanitize values that would cause a subtraction to underflow the representable range.
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 prevent integer underflow defects via input validation, bounds checking, and static analysis.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis can surface underflow flaws after they are introduced.
Routine patching can remediate known underflow bugs once they are discovered in deployed 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 in development catches integer underflow defects before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer underflow.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid underflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe safe integer handling and overflow/underflow prevention.