CVE-2026-4247
Freebsd 14.3 … 15.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-4247 is a high-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Freebsd Freebsd. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked in the top 37% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — 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-2026-4247 is a memory leak vulnerability (CWE-401) in the FreeBSD TCP stack, specifically within the tcp_respond() function. When the function determines that a challenge ACK should not be sent, it returns without consuming the input mbuf, resulting in a leak. This issue affects FreeBSD systems and 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-impact availability disruption with low attack complexity.
Attackers on path with an established TCP connection, or those able to establish their own TCP connection to the affected FreeBSD host, can craft packets meeting the challenge ACK criteria to trigger mbuf leaks for each packet exceeding the configured rate limit (default: first 5 within 1 second). Off-path attackers can also exploit this by guessing IP addresses, TCP ports, and sequence numbers to spoof packets toward the host, though this is technically more challenging. Exploitation causes progressive memory exhaustion through repeated mbuf leaks, enabling denial-of-service.
The FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-26:06.tcp, available at https://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-26:06.tcp.asc, provides details on patches and mitigation measures.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16128
Vulnerability Data
When a challenge ACK is to be sent tcp_respond() constructs and sends the challenge ACK and consumes the mbuf that is passed in. When no challenge ACK should be sent the function returns and leaks the mbuf. If an attacker…
more
is either on path with an established TCP connection, or can themselves establish a TCP connection, to an affected FreeBSD machine, they can easily craft and send packets which meet the challenge ACK criteria and cause the FreeBSD host to leak an mbuf for each crafted packet in excess of the configured rate limit settings i.e. with default settings, crafted packets in excess of the first 5 sent within a 1s period will leak an mbuf. Technically, off-path attackers can also exploit this problem by guessing the IP addresses, TCP port numbers and in some cases the sequence numbers of established connections and spoofing packets towards a FreeBSD machine, but this is harder to do effectively.
- 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, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.
Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.
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 enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.
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 unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.
Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.
Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.
Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.
Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.