Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-43810 is a critical-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Apple Macos. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 44th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-49611
Vulnerability Data
The issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 26.6 and iPadOS 26.6, macOS Sequoia 15.7.8, macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6, tvOS 26.6, visionOS 26.6, watchOS 26.6. A remote user may be able to…
more
cause unexpected system termination or corrupt kernel memory.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V17.3.2V1.4.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover use-after-free bugs through dynamic analysis or fuzzing.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Process isolation confines the blast radius of use-after-free memory corruption to a single execution domain.
Input validation directly enforces bounds checking that stops out-of-bounds reads/writes from being introduced or reached.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
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 catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.