Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-88411

Published
21 September 2026
Modified
22 September 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0028 21th percentile
Risk Priority 56 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-2026-88411 is a high-severity Uncaught Exception (CWE-248) 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 21th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A10:2025 Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper error handling in the GRAPH.EFFECT component (/effects/effects_apply.c) of FalkorDB (Redis module) v4.20.1 leads to a Denial of Service (DoS) within the application.

CWE(s)
CWE-248

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
attack.mitre.org →
T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

Affected Assets

Mitigating Controls

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

SC-24 Fail in Known State
addresses: CWE-248

Prevents abrupt termination from uncaught exceptions by requiring a defined, preserved-state failure mode.

SI-17 Fail-safe Procedures
addresses: CWE-248

Requires pre-defined safe responses for uncaught exceptions so they do not result in undefined or insecure program termination.

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 explicitly require structured exception handling to prevent uncaught exceptions from reaching production.

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.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development lifecycle includes exception-handling standards that reduce uncaught exceptions.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements typically mandate robust error and exception handling.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture principles call for centralized, comprehensive exception management.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards directly require catching and handling exceptions to prevent crashes or leaks.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance partial match
finds

Security testing can detect uncaught exceptions before production deployment.

References