Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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-2026-41416 is a high-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Teluu Pjsip. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 20th 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-2026-41416 is an integer overflow vulnerability (CWE-190) in the PJSIP multimedia communication library, a free and open-source C library used for VoIP and other real-time communication applications. The issue affects versions 2.16 and earlier, occurring during media stream buffer size calculation when processing Session Description Protocol (SDP) messages with asymmetric ptime configurations. This overflow leads to an undersized buffer allocation, potentially causing unexpected application termination or memory corruption. The vulnerability has 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 high severity primarily due to availability impact.
Remote, unauthenticated attackers can exploit this vulnerability by sending specially crafted SDP messages to a vulnerable PJSIP-based application over the network. No user interaction or privileges are required, and exploitation requires low complexity. Successful attacks can trigger denial-of-service through application crashes or, in some cases, memory corruption, potentially enabling further compromise depending on the application's context and memory safety mitigations.
The PJSIP project addressed this vulnerability in version 2.17, with the fixing commit available at https://github.com/pjsip/pjproject/commit/66fe416c96e957417621b7be16e9e587d159f9bb. Additional details are provided in the project's security advisory at https://github.com/pjsip/pjproject/security/advisories/GHSA-f33g-8hjq-62xr, recommending immediate upgrades to the patched version for affected deployments.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25598
Vulnerability Data
PJSIP is a free and open source multimedia communication library written in C. In 2.16 and earlier, there is an integer overflow in media stream buffer size calculation when processing SDP with asymmetric ptime configuration. The overflow may result in…
more
an undersized buffer allocation, which can lead to unexpected application termination or memory corruption This vulnerability is fixed in 2.17.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.2.6
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, unit tests) directly finds integer overflow defects before deployment.
Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.
Input validation enforces bounds on values before arithmetic, stopping the conditions that trigger overflow or wraparound.
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 use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.
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.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.
Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.