Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-5525 is a medium-severity Stack-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-121) vulnerability in Notepad-Plus-Plus Notepad\+\+. Its CVSS base score is 6.0 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-16 (Memory Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-21334
Vulnerability Data
A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in Notepad++ version 8.9.3 in the file drop handler component. When a user drags and drops a directory path of exactly 259 characters without a trailing backslash, the application appends a backslash and null…
more
terminator without proper bounds checking, resulting in a stack buffer overflow and application crash (STATUS_STACK_BUFFER_OVERRUN).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Stack buffer overflow leads directly to application crash, enabling endpoint DoS via exploitation of client-side software.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces bounds and format checks on untrusted path strings supplied via drag-and-drop, preventing the 259-character overflow in the file-drop handler.
Applies OS-level memory protections (ASLR, DEP, stack canaries) that detect and terminate the process on the stack-buffer overrun before code execution.
Requires prompt application of vendor patches that correct the missing length check when appending the backslash in the drop handler.
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-development practices directly prevent introduction of stack buffer overflows.
Vulnerability scanning can discover stack buffer overflows but does not prevent their introduction.
Patching eliminates known instances of the weakness after discovery.
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 (fuzzing, static analysis) detects stack overflows before release.
Secure SDLC mandates buffer-safety practices that directly prevent stack overflows.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and input-validation rules.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety and least-privilege stack usage.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer handling that causes CWE-121.
Change-management gates can enforce security reviews that catch buffer issues.