CVE-2026-84445
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-84445 is a high-severity Improper Validation of Array Index (CWE-129) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 49% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) and SC-24 (Fail in Known State) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-77627
Vulnerability Data
gRPC-Go is the Go language implementation of gRPC. Prior to 1.82.2 and 1.83.2, servers created with xds.NewGRPCServer() allow internal/transport/http2_server.go to accept an RPC containing neither the :authority header nor the Host header, while RouteAndProcess in internal/xds/server/routing.go assumes that an authority…
more
value exists and indexes the empty slice. A remote client that can complete transport connection establishment can trigger an index-out-of-bounds panic that is not recovered by the per-RPC goroutine and terminates the entire server process. In insecure or ordinary TLS deployments the request can be unauthenticated, while strict mTLS or ALTS deployments require valid transport credentials before the malformed RPC can reach the interceptor. This issue is fixed in versions 1.82.2 and 1.83.2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Security engineering principles include robust exception management to keep the system in a defined state.
Fail-in-known-state reduces the impact when an uncaught exception occurs by preserving a safe condition.
Error handling requirements force structured catching and response to exceptions instead of allowing them to propagate uncaught.
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 require input validation and bounds checking that prevent improper array indexing.
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.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevents improper array indexing.
Application security requirements include validation of untrusted input used for indexing or addressing memory structures.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive coding patterns that reduce index-related vulnerabilities.
Secure coding standards explicitly require bounds checking and validation of array indices derived from untrusted data.
Security testing in development can detect out-of-bounds array access but does not prevent the weakness by itself.