CVE Intelligence
High

CVE-2026-102758 — The `_nx_secure_x509_asn1_tlv_block_parse()` function parses ASN.1 TLV…

The `_nx_secure_x509_asn1_tlv_block_parse()` function parses ASN.1 TLV (tag-length-value) blocks out of DER-encoded data. It is the primitive underneath all X.509 certificate parsing in NetX Secure, and therefore runs on certificates supplied by a remote peer during the TLS handshake. The function reads the one-byte ASN.1 tag from the caller's buffer *before* checking that the buffer holds at least one byte. When a caller passes a remaining length of zero, the guard correctly returns `NX_SECURE_X509_ASN1_LENGTH_TOO_LONG`, but the read has already happened one byte past the end of the buffer. code: nx_secure/src/nx_secure_x509_asn1_tlv_block_parse.c ``` UINT _nx_secure_x509_asn1_tlv_block_parse(const UCHAR *buffer, ULONG *buffer_length, USHORT *tlv_type, USHORT *tlv_tag_class, ULONG *tlv_length, const UCHAR **tlv_data, ULONG *header_length) { UINT current_index; USHORT current_tag; ULONG length; ULONG length_bytes; current_index = 0; current_tag = buffer[current_index]; /* <-- read before the bounds check */ if (*buffer_length < 1) { return(NX_SECURE_X509_ASN1_LENGTH_TOO_LONG); } ``` The remainder of the function is correctly ordered. The multi-byte length path is guarded by `length_bytes > 4 || length_bytes > *buffer_length` before its read loop, the decoded value is checked against `length > *buffer_length`, and the second single-byte length read follows its own `*buffer_length < 1` guard. The tag read is the only load placed ahead of its check.

Published Sep 29, 2026 · Updated Oct 16, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: eclipse

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.17%
ahead of 6% of scored CVEs · Oct 16, 2026
Affects
Eclipse Foundation
NetX Duo
CVSS base
7.5
High · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
Yes
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Eclipse Foundation NetX Duo).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Eclipse Foundation NetX Duo ≤ 6.5.1.202602 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High 3.9 3.6 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High — — CISA-ADP via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-126

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 15, 2026 → Oct 16, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.17%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · eclipse foundation/netx duo
    Oct 16, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 16, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.5
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Sep 29, 2026 · eclipse

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Eclipse Foundation
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-126
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-106465 Authentication Bypass by Spoofing in Eclipse Foundation NetX Duo 2d
  • CVE-2026-106464 Out-of-bounds Read in Eclipse Foundation NetX Duo 2d
  • CVE-2026-103415 Out-of-bounds Write in Eclipse Foundation NetX Duo 2d
  • CVE-2026-102717 MQTT WebSocket setter ABI mismatch may disclose memory or cause a crash 16d
  • CVE-2026-102759 NetX Secure TLS accepts an empty application-data record without verifying its message… 17d
  • CVE-2026-102762 Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime in Eclipse Foundation NetX Duo 17d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-102758 is "The `_nx_secure_x509_asn1_tlv_block_parse()` function parses ASN.1 TLV…", rated High. It affects NetX Duo (Eclipse Foundation); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.17% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.