Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-41992 is a medium-severity Buffer Over-read (CWE-126) vulnerability in Gnu Gzip. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique OS Credential Dumping (T1003); ranked at the 26th 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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-40069
- 🇵🇱 CERT-PL: cert.pl
Vulnerability Data
GNU gzip contains a global buffer overflow vulnerability in the LZH decompression logic caused by improper reuse of shared global state between different decompression formats within a single execution. GNU gzip maintains a global array that is shared across the…
more
LZ77, LZW, and LZH decompression routines and is not reinitialized between files processed in the same invocation. By decompressing a specially crafted LZW file followed by a specially crafted LZH file in a single gzip -d command, an attacker can poison the shared global state and subsequently trigger an out‑of‑bounds read in the LZH decoder. The LZH decompression logic follows stale values left in the shared array, causing reads past the end of the allocated global buffer. This issue has been fixed in the commit 63dbf6b3b9e6e781df1a6a64e609b10e23969681
- 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 (static analysis, fuzzing, bounds checking tests) directly finds buffer over-read flaws.
Engineering principles such as memory-safe design and bounds-checked abstractions structurally stop introduction of out-of-bounds reads.
Process isolation limits the blast radius of an over-read to the compromised domain.
Input validation enforces length and index constraints that prevent many externally triggered over-reads.
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 directly prevent introduction of buffer over-read weaknesses.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover buffer over-read flaws via scanning or review.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software removes known instances of buffer over-read bugs.
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 buffer over-reads before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and bounds checking that can prevent buffer over-reads.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and bounds-checking rules.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety and bounds-checking design choices.
Secure coding standards directly require bounds-checked buffer access, mitigating over-reads.