CVE Intelligence
High Memory corruption exploit reference

CVE-2026-28221 — Wazuh: Pre-auth stack-based buffer overflow in wazuh-remoted print_hex_string() due to signed char promotion on x86_64

Wazuh is a free and open source platform used for threat prevention, detection, and response. From version 4.8.0 to before version 4.14.4, a stack-based buffer overflow exists in print_hex_string() in wazuh-remoted. The bug is triggered when formatting attacker-controlled bytes using sprintf(dst_buf + 2*i, "%.2x", src_buf[i]) on platforms where char is treated as signed and the compiled code sign-extends bytes before the variadic call. For input bytes such as 0xFF, the formatting can emit "ffffffff" (8 chars) instead of "ff" (2 chars), causing an out-of-bounds write past a fixed 2049-byte stack buffer. The vulnerable path is reachable remotely prior to any agent authentication/registration logic via TCP/1514 when an oversized length prefix causes the “unexpected message (hex)” diagnostic path to run. Additionally, the same unauthenticated oversized-message diagnostic path logs an attacker-controlled hex dump to /var/ossec/logs/ossec.log for each trigger, allowing remote log amplification that can degrade monitoring fidelity and consume disk/I/O. This log amplification is reachable even without triggering the sign-extension overflow (e.g., using bytes < 0x80). This issue has been patched in version 4.14.4.

Published Apr 29, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

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 0.6% (30-day exploitation probability)+7
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
  • 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
0.57%
ahead of 46% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Wazuh
Wazuh
CVSS base
8.2
High · 3 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
Proof of concept
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 (Wazuh Wazuh).
  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 matching the vulnerability class (memory corruption), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Wazuh Wazuh ≥ 4.8.0 and < 4.14.4 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Wazuh Wazuh version >= 4.8.0, < 4.14.4 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
Low
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
8.2 CVSS 3.1 High 3.9 4.2 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 3.9 2.5 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)
Scoring entities (NIST, CNA, ADP) score independently; each score is shown with its origin. For prioritization we use 8.2 (NVD (NIST)) as a conservative provisional reference — not a definitive official score.

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-121 · Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.57%

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).
  • Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSendpoint telemetry (EDR)crash dumps

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · wazuh/wazuh
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 8.2
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Apr 29, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Wazuh
every CVE for this vendor
Memory corruption
same class
CWE-121
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-41499 Wazuh: Multiple Heap-based NULL WRITE Buffer Underflows in parse_uname_string() Apr 29, 2026
  • CVE-2026-30893 Wazuh cluster sync path traversal in decompress_files() enables arbitrary file write and code execution from authenticated cluster peer Apr 29, 2026
  • CVE-2026-26206 Wazuh: API brute-force protection bypass via race condition in login attempt tracking Apr 29, 2026
  • CVE-2026-26204 Wazuh: Heap-based NULL WRITE Buffer Underflow in GetAlertData Apr 29, 2026
  • CVE-2025-15612 Wazuh Provisioning Scripts / Build Infrastructure Improper Certificate Validation leading to MITM and RCE Mar 27, 2026
  • CVE-2025-15617 Wazuh GitHub Actions Workflow Exposure of Sensitive Credentials Mar 27, 2026

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-2026-28221 is "Wazuh: Pre-auth stack-based buffer overflow in wazuh-remoted print_hex_string() due to signed char promotion on x86_64", rated High. It affects Wazuh (Wazuh); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.2 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.57% 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.