Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-8463 is a medium-severity Buffer Over-read (CWE-126) vulnerability in Leont Crypt\. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 25th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-29956
Vulnerability Data
Crypt::Argon2 versions from 0.017 before 0.031 for Perl perform a heap out-of-bounds read in argon2_verify on empty encoded input. The auto-detect form of argon2_verify passes encoded_len - 1 as the length argument to memchr without checking that encoded_len is non-zero.…
more
When the encoded string is empty, the size_t subtraction underflows to SIZE_MAX and memchr scans adjacent heap memory looking for a '$' separator byte. A caller that invokes argon2_verify against a stored hash that may legitimately be empty (for example a placeholder row or a NULL column materialised as an empty string) reads out-of-bounds heap memory, which can crash the process or leak the position of an adjacent '$' byte into subsequent parsing.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, bounds checking tests) directly finds buffer over-read flaws.
Engineering principles such as memory-safe design and bounds-checked abstractions structurally stop introduction of out-of-bounds reads.
Process isolation limits the blast radius of an over-read to the compromised domain.
Input validation enforces length and index constraints that prevent many externally triggered over-reads.
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 identification processes can discover buffer over-read flaws via scanning or review.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software removes known instances of buffer over-read bugs.
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 can detect buffer over-reads before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and bounds checking that can prevent buffer over-reads.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and bounds-checking rules.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety and bounds-checking design choices.
Secure coding standards directly require bounds-checked buffer access, mitigating over-reads.