Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-73446

Published
16 September 2026
Modified
16 September 2026
CVSS Score v4 7.0
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0025 16th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-73446 is a high-severity Incorrect Behavior Order (CWE-696) vulnerability in Arista EOS (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 7.0 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 16th 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 RA-5 (Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

On affected platforms running Arista EOS with IS-IS configured on a broadcast interface, an unauthenticated attacker can send a crafted IS-IS Hello Protocol Data Unit (PDU) that causes the device to tear down an established IS-IS adjacency. This may result…

more

in traffic disruption and loss of IP reachability for prefixes advertised through that adjacency.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-45157Shared CWE-696
CVE-2025-55114Shared CWE-696
CVE-2025-31485Shared CWE-696
CVE-2025-20012Shared CWE-696
CVE-2026-44108Shared CWE-696
CVE-2024-24853Shared CWE-696
CVE-2023-23576Shared CWE-696
CVE-2026-56355Shared CWE-696
CVE-2026-14169Shared CWE-696
CVE-2025-0150Shared CWE-696

Affected Assets

Arista
EOS
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Vulnerability scanning may surface order-related weaknesses after code is built but does not address their root cause.

Developer testing and evaluation at post-design stages can discover incorrect ordering of related behaviors before deployment.

Mandating a documented development process and standards enforces review of behavior ordering within the software lifecycle.

Security and privacy engineering principles applied during design and implementation directly require correct sequencing of operations to avoid introducing order-dependent flaws.

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 partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly enforce correct sequencing of security-relevant operations during design and coding.

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.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates correct sequencing of security activities, directly preventing incorrect behavior order.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles require proper ordering of design and implementation steps.

prevents

Secure coding standards enforce correct execution order of security-critical operations.

finds

Security testing can detect ordering flaws but does not prevent them during development.

References