Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-40454 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Apache IoTDB C (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 25th 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-2026-42839
Vulnerability Data
Out-of-bounds Read, Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Apache IoTDB C++ client. Out-of-bounds reads in IoTDB C++ client TsBlock deserializer crash client process on malformed server data. This issue affects Apache IoTDB C++ client: from 1.3.5 before 1.3.8, from 2.0.5 before…
more
2.0.10. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.0.10, which fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
The out-of-bounds read in the Apache IoTDB C++ client TsBlock deserializer is triggered by malformed server data, directly enabling exploitation of a public-facing IoTDB service (T1190). No other techniques are clearly supported by the given description.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SI-10 requires validation of all input received from external sources, directly preventing the malformed TsBlock data that triggers the out-of-bounds read in the C++ client.
SC-7 boundary protection can restrict which servers the C++ client communicates with, reducing exposure to malicious or compromised IoTDB servers that could send malformed data.
SI-2 mandates timely application of security-relevant patches; upgrading the vulnerable IoTDB C++ client from 1.3.5-1.3.8 or 2.0.5-2.0.10 to 2.0.10 eliminates the out-of-bounds read flaw.
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.
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.
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.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
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.