CVE-2026-110747

HIGHPre-NVD 7.57.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This high-severity CVE scores 7.5 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.4% (33rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-111531 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 7.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

ProtobufParser._readStringKey() reads the length prefix of a protobuf map entry's string key into an attacker-controlled int and then checks (_inputPtr + len) <= _inputEnd using signed arithmetic. For values near Integer.MAX_VALUE the addition overflows to a negative value and the check passes even when the input contains no key data. The parser then calls _finishShortText(len), which expands the text buffer to the declared length via TextBuffer.expandCurrentSegment and Arrays.copyOf, throwing OutOfMemoryError: Requested array size exceeds VM limit.

An 8-byte malformed message containing a map entry with a declared key length of 0x7FFFFFFF is sufficient. Configured StreamReadConstraints, including maxStringLength, maxNameLength, maxDocumentLength and maxNestingDepth, do not prevent the failure. Applications running with -XX:+ExitOnOutOfMemoryError terminate the JVM.

This is the same integer-overflow pattern addressed for other call sites in the remediation associated with CVE-2026-104016 and CVE-2026-104017; the map-key call site was corrected on the 3.x branches only, leaving the corresponding 2.x branches unguarded. Release lines 2.18, 2.19 and 2.20 do not contain _readStringKey() and are not affected by this vector. No privileges or user interaction beyond the ability to submit data for parsing are required. The 3.0 release line and 3.1.0-3.1.5 / 3.2.0-3.2.1 do not contain _readStringKey() and are therefore not affected; the method first appears in 3.1.6 and 3.2.2, mirroring its introduction at 2.21.6 on the 2.x side.

CVSS v3
7.5
EG Score
7.5HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
49
EG Risk 49/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity75% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.5 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
33rd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.5 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-06). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 28, 2026

Last Modified

November 6, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Oct 28, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

jackson-dataformat-protobuf: `ProtobufParser._readStringKey()` (map string-key) integer overflow [CVE-2026-110747] · Advisory · FasterXML/jackson-dataformats-binary · GitHub

https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-dataformats-binary/security/advisories/GHSA-fv7v-rrmh-4qcv

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-110747(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatcom.fasterxml.jackson.dataformat/jackson-dataformat-protobuf:2.21.8.redhat-000012026-10-27redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jackson-dataformats-binary2.18.11-1
  • every version up to 2.22.4-1: fixed in 2.22.4-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 21× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  2. 2026-11-11 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  3. 2026-11-10 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  4. 2026-11-09 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  5. 2026-11-08 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  6. 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  7. 2026-11-06 19:27 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  8. 2026-11-06 19:27 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-11-06 18:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  10. 2026-11-06 18:47 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-11-06 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  12. 2026-11-05 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  13. 2026-11-04 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  14. 2026-11-04 08:02 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-04 08:02 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-11-03 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  17. 2026-11-02 16:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  18. 2026-11-01 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  19. 2026-10-31 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  20. 2026-10-30 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  21. 2026-10-29 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  22. 2026-10-28 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 32nd percentile
  23. 2026-10-28 01:28 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-10-28 01:01 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-111531 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  25. 2026-10-28 00:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 7.5 HIGH
Show 1 more
  1. 2026-10-28 00:44 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-110747?
CVE-2026-110747 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 28, 2026. ProtobufParser._readStringKey() reads the length prefix of a protobuf map entry's string key into an attacker-controlled int and then checks (_inputPtr + len) <= _inputEnd using signed arithmetic. For values near Integer.MAX_VALUE the addition overflows to a negative value and the check passes even…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-110747 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-110747 was published on October 28, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of November 6, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-110747 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-110747 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (33rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-110747?
CVE-2026-110747 has a CVSS base score of 7.5 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-110747?
A fix for CVE-2026-110747 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-110747 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-110747

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-110747?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.