Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-57452 is a medium-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Vim Vim. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 2th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-39448
Vulnerability Data
Vim is an open source, command line text editor. Prior to 9.2.0671, when Vim opens a file encrypted with the VimCrypt~04! or VimCrypt~05! method (xchacha20poly1305, requires the +sodium feature) whose body is shorter than a single libsodium secretstream header, an…
more
unsigned length calculation underflows and a subsequent decryption call reads far past the end of the input buffer, crashing Vim. This vulnerability is fixed in 9.2.0671.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Buffer over-read triggers application crash, directly enabling T1499.004 via malicious file.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires applying the vendor patch (9.2.0671) that corrects the unsigned length underflow before any decryption of a short VimCrypt~04/05 file occurs.
Mandates validation of input length and structure on file open, which would reject a libsodium secretstream header shorter than the required size and avoid the subsequent out-of-bounds read.
Requires ongoing vulnerability scanning that would identify the known unpatched Vim flaw (CWE-125/191) before an attacker-supplied short encrypted file can be opened.
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 integer underflow defects via input validation, bounds checking, and static analysis.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.