Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-42199 is a medium-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 6.2 (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.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-28834
Vulnerability Data
Grid is a data structure grid for rust. From version 0.17.0 to before version 1.0.1, an integer overflow in Grid::expand_rows() can corrupt the relationship between the grid’s logical dimensions and its backing storage. After the internal invariant is broken, the…
more
safe API get() may invoke get_unchecked() with an invalid index, resulting in Undefined Behavior. This issue has been patched in version 1.0.1.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Integer overflow triggers UB/memory corruption in library API, directly enabling local exploitation for privilege escalation or client-side code execution.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires applying the vendor patch (v1.0.1) that eliminates the integer overflow in expand_rows().
Requires validation of inputs that drive row/column expansion so that arithmetic cannot overflow and break the grid invariant.
Enforces memory-safety protections that would contain or block the out-of-bounds access performed by the unsafe get_unchecked() call after the invariant is broken.
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.
Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.
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.