CVE-2026-84268
What it is
A flaw was found in the SFTP backend in gvfs. When mounting a share and reading a file, a malicious SFTP server can cause read_reply() to process a length that exceeds the size requested by the client. The function does not verify the server-provided length against the allocated buffer size, causing the operation to write past the intended boundaries. This issue allows a malicious server to corrupt adjacent heap memory in the gvfsd-sftp process, resulting in a denial of service as the process aborts upon detecting the heap corruption or potentially allowing arbitrary code execution.
At a glance
- Exploitability
- Can be exploited over the network without logging in, but needs a user to act. High risk of data exposure, data tampering, service disruption.
- Exploit odds
- 0.6% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Fix
- No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.
Timeline
- ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
- PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
- Last updatedMost recent change to the record
Why it ranks here
- Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
- Exploit odds: 0.6% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Severity: 8.8 HIGH (CVSS).
- Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.6% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Weakness
- CWE-122
- Record status
- Awaiting Analysis
Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 8.8
- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Is it in your code?
Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.
Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2026-84268.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-84268. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
References
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:73997
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:73998
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:74370
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85939
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85940
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85941
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85942
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85943
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85944
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:85945
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:86606
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-84268
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2526485
- https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gvfs/-/issues/862