CVE-2026-35377
Uutils Coreutils
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-35377 is a low-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Uutils Coreutils. Its CVSS base score is 3.3 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 1th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25030
Vulnerability Data
A logic error in the env utility of uutils coreutils causes a failure to correctly parse command-line arguments when utilizing the -S (split-string) option. In GNU env, backslashes within single quotes are treated literally (with the exceptions of \\ and…
more
\'). However, the uutils implementation incorrectly attempts to validate these sequences, resulting in an "invalid sequence" error and an immediate process termination with an exit status of 125 when encountering valid but unrecognized sequences like \a or \x. This divergence from GNU behavior breaks compatibility for automated scripts and administrative workflows that rely on standard split-string semantics, leading to a local denial of service for those operations.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Input validation flaw in env -S allows crafted arguments to trigger immediate process termination, enabling local application DoS via exploitation.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces validation of command-line arguments (including backslash sequences under -S) against expected GNU env semantics to reject malformed or divergent inputs before processing.
Requires prompt remediation of the identified logic flaw in argument parsing so that the utility correctly accepts valid single-quoted backslash sequences without terminating.
Verifies integrity of the env binary and its input-handling routines, enabling detection of the incorrect parser implementation that produces exit-125 failures.
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 require and enforce input validation during development.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.