Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-87081 is a high-severity Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity (CWE-407) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 29th 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 SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) and SC-6 (Resource Availability) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-84294
Vulnerability Data
Net::IDN::UTS46 versions before 2.590 for Perl allow CPU exhaustion via quadratic punycode encoding of an overlong label before the length check in to_ascii. to_ascii punycode encodes each label and only then applies the 63-byte DNS limit. encode_punycode in both backends…
more
follows the sample implementation in RFC 3492, whose outer loop runs once per distinct non-ASCII code point and scans the whole input each round, so a label of distinct non-ASCII characters costs the square of its length before the limit rejects it. Every ASCII conversion in the distribution, including domain_to_ascii and email_to_ascii, goes through to_ascii.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.9
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Denial-of-service protection directly reduces the impact of resource exhaustion triggered by worst-case algorithmic inputs.
Resource availability allocation limits blast radius when an inefficient algorithm is forced into its worst case.
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.
Runtime monitoring of software and resources can detect the performance impact of triggered worst-case complexity.
Identifying and recording algorithmic-complexity vulnerabilities directly addresses the root cause before exploitation.
Secure SDLC practices (code review, complexity analysis, safe algorithm selection) prevent introduction of exploitable worst-case behavior.
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.
Redundancy of processing facilities can absorb resource exhaustion from inefficient algorithms.
Monitoring activities can identify anomalous resource consumption indicative of algorithmic complexity attacks.
Secure development life cycle includes design reviews that can catch inefficient algorithms before deployment.
Secure system architecture principles encourage selection of algorithms with acceptable worst-case complexity.
Secure coding practices can include guidelines to avoid or mitigate inefficient algorithms.
Security testing can uncover performance issues stemming from algorithmic complexity.