Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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-2026-43622 is a high-severity Double Free (CWE-415) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 3th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as NLP and Transformers.
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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-54096
Vulnerability Data
llama.cpp builds b1886 through b7445 contain a double free vulnerability in the LLaMA-Android JNI wrapper where new_1batch() allocates memory using malloc() while free_1batch() deallocates it using the C++ delete operator, causing heap metadata corruption. Attackers can trigger this memory management…
more
mismatch to cause denial of service through process crashes or potentially achieve arbitrary code execution depending on allocator state.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- NLP and Transformers
- Risk Domain
- N/A
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: llama.cpp, llama
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation explicitly includes dynamic analysis and fuzzing that locate double-free defects before release.
Documented development standards and tools can enforce or check for correct pairing of allocators and deallocators.
Security engineering principles can require memory-safe allocation patterns or language features that structurally eliminate double-free opportunities.
Flaw remediation processes require identification and correction of memory-management defects such as double free once discovered.
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 prevent double-free errors via static analysis, safe memory APIs, and testing.
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 double-free conditions before release.
Secure development life cycle includes memory-safety practices that can prevent double-free bugs.
Application security requirements can mandate memory-safety rules that reduce double-free risk.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles can prescribe safe memory-management patterns.
Secure coding standards directly address proper use of free() and similar functions.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248590 OL 8 must clear the page allocator to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-415