Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-48691 is a critical-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Pavel-Odintsov Fastnetmon. 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 24th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-31898
Vulnerability Data
FastNetMon Community Edition through 1.2.9 contains an integer overflow in the BGP AS_PATH attribute encoder. In src/bgp_protocol.hpp, the IPv4UnicastAnnounce::get_attributes() function computes attribute_length as 'sizeof(bgp_as_path_segment_element_t) + this->as_path_asns.size() * sizeof(uint32_t)' and stores it in a uint8_t field (line 600-605). Since uint8_t can…
more
only hold values 0-255, an AS_PATH containing more than 63 ASNs (2 + 64*4 = 258 > 255) causes silent truncation. The truncated length is used for buffer sizing, while the actual data written is the full untruncated amount, resulting in a heap buffer overflow. Similarly, the path_segment_length field at line 621 is also uint8_t, truncating with more than 255 ASNs.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.1V5.2.6
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, unit tests) directly finds integer overflow defects before deployment.
Input validation enforces bounds checking on data written to heap buffers, directly stopping the overflow condition from being introduced.
Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability of a heap overflow to execute attacker-controlled code or corrupt adjacent structures.
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.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover heap-overflow flaws but does not prevent their introduction in code.
Timely patching removes known heap-overflow instances after they exist.
Secure SDLC practices directly require use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.
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.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.
Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.