Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-58011 is a medium-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 29th 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-2 (Flaw Remediation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-40313
Vulnerability Data
A flaw was found in GLib. An out-of-bounds read of only 2 bytes can occur in the g_date_time_get_ymd function in the glib/gdatetime.c file when an invalid GDateTime object produced by the g_date_time_add_full function is processed. This flaw can corrupt the…
more
date output and potentially cause logic errors that may lead to a denial of service.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Out-of-bounds read flaw enables application exploitation resulting in denial of service via logic errors or crashes.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires timely patching or updating of the vulnerable GLib library to eliminate the out-of-bounds read in g_date_time_get_ymd / g_date_time_add_full.
Requires validation of inputs to date/time functions so that invalid GDateTime objects capable of triggering the 2-byte OOB read are never created.
Implements memory bounds checking or guard pages that can stop the out-of-bounds read from corrupting date output or causing denial of service.
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 such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
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.