Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-40026 is a medium-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Sleuthkit The Sleuth Kit. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 3th 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 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.
The Sleuth Kit through version 4.14.0 is affected by an out-of-bounds read vulnerability (CWE-125) in its ISO9660 filesystem parser. The issue resides in the parse_susp() function, which trusts the len_id, len_des, and len_src fields from a disk image without verifying that the source data falls within the parsed SUSP block before using memcpy to copy data into a stack buffer. This allows reads past the end of the SUSP data buffer. Additionally, a zero-length SUSP entry can trigger an infinite parsing loop.
Exploitation requires local access (AV:L) with low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges (PR:N), and user interaction (UI:R), such as opening a malicious ISO image with the affected software. Successful exploitation can result in low-impact confidentiality loss (C:L) through potential information disclosure from the out-of-bounds read, or low-impact availability disruption (A:L) via denial of service from the buffer overread or infinite loop, with no integrity impact (I:N) and unchanged scope (S:U). The overall CVSS v3.1 base score is 4.4 (Medium).
Mitigation is addressed in patches referenced in the Sleuth Kit GitHub repository, including commit a95b0ac21733b059a517aaefa667a17e1bcbdee1 and pull request #3445. Additional details are available in advisories from VulnCheck and other sources like mobasi.ai/sentinel. Security practitioners should update to a patched version of Sleuth Kit beyond 4.14.0 when analyzing disk images.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-20763
Vulnerability Data
The Sleuth Kit through 4.14.0 contains an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the ISO9660 filesystem parser where the parse_susp() function trusts len_id, len_des, and len_src fields from the disk image to memcpy data into a stack buffer without verifying that the…
more
source data falls within the parsed SUSP block. An attacker can craft a malicious ISO image that causes reads past the end of the SUSP data buffer, and a zero-length SUSP entry can trigger an infinite parsing loop.
- 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 directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
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 such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.