Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-55717

Memory Safety in Nlnetlabs Unbound 1.10.0 – 1.25.2

Published
22 July 2026
Modified
24 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0024 15th percentile
Risk Priority 45 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-55717 is a medium-severity NULL Pointer Dereference (CWE-476) vulnerability in Nlnetlabs Unbound. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 15th 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.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In NLnet Labs Unbound 1.10.0 up to and including 1.25.1, when 'serve-expired: yes' is set together with a 'response-ip: <net> redirect' /'response-ip-data: <net> CNAME <target>' rule (or the RPZ 'rpz-cname-override' equivalent), a remote client who controls any delegated domain can…

more

crash the daemon. The serve-expired-client-timeout callback runs a two-pass loop to chase the respip-generated CNAME alias; on the second pass it resets 'alias_rrset' but not 'partial_rep'. Later, this inconsistency leads to a NULL pointer dereference and an eventual crash. A malicious actor can exploit the vulnerability by controlling any zone that replies with an A/AAAA record that falls inside the configured response-ip/rpz subnet. By delaying the answer when the previous record has expired, the vulnerable path of 'serve-expired-client-timeout' is taken leading to denial of service via the server crash.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
T1489 Service Stop Impact
Adversaries may stop or disable services on a system to render those services unavailable to legitimate users.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-44621Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-41637Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-42923Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-56444Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-44390Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-32665Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-41292Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-42534Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-55991Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound
CVE-2026-44690Same product: Nlnetlabs Unbound

Affected Assets

nlnetlabs
unbound
1.10.0 — 1.25.2

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (including static analysis) directly finds null-dereference bugs before deployment.

Documented development standards and tools can enforce null-safety rules and safe pointer usage.

Engineering principles can mandate defensive coding such as explicit null checks before dereference.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices (static analysis, code review, safe coding standards) directly prevent NULL dereference bugs during development.

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.

finds

Security testing can detect NULL dereference defects before release.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates defensive coding practices that can prevent NULL dereferences.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify input validation and pointer-safety rules.

prevents

Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design that avoids unsafe pointer use.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require NULL-pointer checks and safe dereference patterns.

References