In FRRouting, bgpd accepts a Tunnel Encapsulation attribute (type 23) whose outer TLV length does not match the length of the attribute: the mismatch is only logged and the attribute is processed anyway. A BGP neighbor can send UPDATE messages carrying such an attribute that put the reference count of the attribute's interned sub-TLV chain out of balance, so that the chain is freed while routes stored by bgpd (Adj-RIB-In entries and RIB paths) still point to it. When those routes are later replaced, withdrawn or cleared, for example when the session goes down, bgpd reads the freed memory, decrements a reference count inside it and frees it a second time. In the reporter's build without AddressSanitizer this ended in an assertion failure in bgpd's memory accounting, aborting bgpd and dropping all BGP sessions on the router, and the neighbor can repeat it each time bgpd restarts. Because freed heap memory is written to and freed again, consequences beyond a crash cannot be ruled out. An established BGP session is required. bgpd processes attribute 23 from every neighbor, including eBGP neighbors, unless it is explicitly discarded, although RFC 9012 requires it to be filtered on eBGP sessions by default. The issue was reproduced with "soft-reconfiguration inbound" configured for the neighbor, and the reporter observed that the crash does not occur on every attempt.
CVE-2026-129456
This high-severity CVE scores 7.7 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.
Also known asEUVD-2026-125947 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD
- High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
An upstream fix is merged but not yet released — mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation) until the release ships, then apply it.
- CVSS
- 7.7
- EG Score
- 7.7HIGHlow confidence
- EG Risk
- 35EG Risk 35/100
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)Severity77% × 45%Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.Exploitation0% × 40%No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.Automatability0% × 15%The CVE's CVSS v4.0 Automatable metric (AU): no. CERT/CC intends it to be interchangeable with SSVC's Automatable.SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CVSS v4.0 Automatable metric) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Until the release ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule, then apply it. - EPSS PROB
- —
- EPSS %ILE
- —
- 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 (7.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.7 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source
- EG Likelihood
- Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
- 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; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.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; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Until the release ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule, then apply it.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CVSS v4.0 Automatable metric) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CVSS v4.0 Automatable metric) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). 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
November 14, 2026
Last Modified
November 14, 2026
Advisory Details (4)
Auto-updated Nov 14, 2026commit abef07b500e1 (FRRouting/frr)
Fix landed in FRRouting/frr commit abef07b500e1 — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/commit/abef07b500e19baa924d157ab03809b93730e619commit bebf95f02bc0 (FRRouting/frr)
Fix landed in FRRouting/frr commit bebf95f02bc0 — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/commit/bebf95f02bc0dccc6a1841f0c8cbcba1f617d655bgpd: Prevent heap use-after-free for tunnel encapsulation attribute
Fix merged in FRRouting/frr PR #21176 on 2026-03-14 — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/21176/changes/1238ac4a06e5c23595e8bf626856f297d0c302a2bgpd: heap-use-after-free in encap_unintern() · Issue #20874 · FRRouting/frr · GitHub
https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/issues/20874Weakness Classification(2)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 2× in last 7d / 2× 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 → 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.
- 2026-11-14 20:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-14 20:02 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-125947 · Source: ENISA EUVD
- 2026-11-14 19:18 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 7.7 HIGH
- 2026-11-14 19:17 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked
Related CVEs(same CWE)
Frequently asked(4)
What is CVE-2026-129456?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-129456 published?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-129456?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-129456?
Dependency Blast Radius
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-129456
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-129456?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.