CVE-2026-45232
Samba Rsync ≤ 3.4.3
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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-2026-45232 is a low-severity Off-by-one Error (CWE-193) vulnerability in Samba Rsync. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
Operationally, ranked at the 26th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and RA-5 (Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-31009
Vulnerability Data
Rsync versions before 3.4.3 contain an off-by-one out-of-bounds stack write vulnerability in the establish_proxy_connection() function in socket.c that allows network attackers to corrupt stack memory by sending a malformed HTTP proxy response. Attackers can exploit this by positioning themselves between…
more
the client and proxy or controlling the proxy server to send a response line of 1023 or more bytes without a newline terminator, causing a null byte to be written to an out-of-bounds stack address when the RSYNC_PROXY environment variable is set.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Insufficient information to map techniques.CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires timely patching or upgrading of rsync to version 3.4.3+ to eliminate the off-by-one flaw in establish_proxy_connection().
Boundary protection at network egress points can block an attacker positioned between the rsync client and an untrusted HTTP proxy from supplying the malformed 1023-byte response.
Regular vulnerability scanning can identify installations of rsync < 3.4.3 that remain exposed when RSYNC_PROXY is set.
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 off-by-one errors via reviews, static analysis, 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 and acceptance can detect off-by-one errors before release.
Secure development life cycle includes requirements and reviews that can catch off-by-one errors.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and input validation to prevent off-by-one errors.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding practices that reduce off-by-one mistakes.
Secure coding directly addresses off-by-one errors through coding standards and peer review.