Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-34772 is a medium-severity Use After Free (CWE-416) vulnerability in Electronjs Electron. Its CVSS base score is 5.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 11th 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-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-2026-34772 is a use-after-free vulnerability (CWE-416) in the Electron framework, which enables developers to build cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML, and CSS. It affects Electron versions prior to 38.8.6, 39.8.0, 40.7.0, and 41.0.0-beta.8, but only in applications that both permit downloads and programmatically destroy sessions at runtime. The flaw occurs when a session is torn down while a native save-file dialog remains open for a download; dismissing the dialog then dereferences already-freed memory, potentially causing a crash or memory corruption. Applications that do not destroy sessions dynamically or disable downloads are unaffected. The issue carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.8 (AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L).
Exploitation requires local access to the target system with no privileges (PR:N), but demands high attacker complexity (AC:H) and user interaction (UI:R), such as the victim dismissing a download save dialog at a precise moment when the application tears down the session. A successful attack could result in high confidentiality impact through memory corruption enabling information disclosure, alongside low integrity and availability impacts like application crashes.
The Electron security advisory at https://github.com/electron/electron/security/advisories/GHSA-9w97-2464-8783 details the patch, recommending upgrades to Electron 38.8.6, 39.8.0, 40.7.0, or 41.0.0-beta.8 for remediation. Developers should audit applications for session destruction during active downloads and consider disabling unnecessary download features if patching is delayed.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-18943
Vulnerability Data
Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. Prior to versions 38.8.6, 39.8.0, 40.7.0, and 41.0.0-beta.8, apps that allow downloads and programmatically destroy sessions may be vulnerable to a use-after-free. If a session is…
more
torn down while a native save-file dialog is open for a download, dismissing the dialog dereferences freed memory, which may lead to a crash or memory corruption. Apps that do not destroy sessions at runtime, or that do not permit downloads, are not affected. This issue has been patched in versions 38.8.6, 39.8.0, 40.7.0, and 41.0.0-beta.8.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V1.4.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover use-after-free bugs through dynamic analysis or fuzzing.
Engineering principles can require memory-safe constructs or languages that structurally avoid introducing use-after-free.
Process isolation confines the blast radius of use-after-free memory corruption to a single execution domain.
Memory protection controls limit exploitation impact by blocking unauthorized code execution from dangling pointers.
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 incorporate memory-safety tooling and reviews that prevent most use-after-free defects.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover use-after-free issues via scanning or analysis but do not prevent their introduction.
Routine patching removes known use-after-free instances after they have been introduced in released 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 can detect use-after-free bugs before release.
Secure SDLC mandates memory-safety practices that reduce use-after-free defects.
Application security requirements can specify memory-management rules that mitigate use-after-free.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety design choices that limit use-after-free exposure.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe avoidance of use-after-free patterns.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248592 OL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230279 RHEL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
- V-257794 RHEL 9 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416