CVE-2026-45287
Opentelemetry Telemetry Schema Files ≤ 0.0.17
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-45287 is a low-severity Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime (CWE-772) vulnerability in Opentelemetry Telemetry Schema Files. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 6th 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 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-2026-34291
Vulnerability Data
OpenTelemetry-Go is the Go implementation of OpenTelemetry. Prior to version 0.0.17, `go.opentelemetry.io/otel/schema/v1.0` and `go.opentelemetry.io/otel/schema/v1.1` leaks one file descriptor on each successful `ParseFile` call. `ParseFile` opens the schema file and passes it to `Parse` without closing it; repeated parsing in a…
more
long-running process can exhaust the process file descriptor limit and cause denial of service. Exploitation depends on a consuming application exposing repeated schema parsing to an attacker-controlled path. Version 0.0.17 contains a patch for the issue.
- 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 can discover missing resource releases through dynamic analysis or stress testing.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate explicit resource-release patterns in code.
Engineering principles can mandate explicit resource-release patterns that stop descriptor/handle leaks from being coded.
Resource-quota allocation limits the blast radius of an unreleased-resource exhaustion condition.
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.
Lifecycle management explicitly requires handling resources through end-of-life including release.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent missing resource-release defects during development.
Runtime monitoring may surface resource-exhaustion symptoms but does not address release logic.
Capacity monitoring can detect exhaustion caused by unreleased resources but does not prevent the root defect.
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.
Explicit information-deletion requirements directly address timely release of resources after use.
Security testing can detect unreleased descriptors, providing partial coverage of the weakness.
Secure-SDLC practices include resource-management reviews, yet the control covers the entire lifecycle, not just this weakness.
Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit resource-release patterns, but the control is broader than this single weakness.
Change-management processes may catch missing de-allocation during reviews, but the control itself does not target resource lifetime.