CVE-2026-53994 — ProFTPD mod_sftp Heap Buffer Overflow via Unsigned Integer Underflow and Size Truncation
ProFTPD mod_sftp contains a heap-based buffer overflow reachable by an authenticated SFTP user. The fxp_packet_read() function accepts the attacker-supplied 32-bit big-endian SFTP packet length without a minimum sanity check. A value of 0 causes an unsigned subtraction elsewhere in the read path to underflow to approximately 4 GB. That oversized request reaches the core memory allocator, where the rounded size is computed in size_t but passed to new_block() as a 32-bit int; the low 32 bits of 0x100000000 are 0, so new_block() returns a small (~512-byte) block while the caller is told it received ~4 GB. The subsequent fill loop then streams attacker-controlled bytes past the end of the 544-byte allocation, producing an attacker-controlled heap buffer overflow. An authenticated user can crash the per-connection ProFTPD session child on demand with a single malformed SFTP packet (packet_len=0 followed by a body greater than approximately 544 bytes), producing reliable authenticated remote denial of service. Depending on heap layout and adjacent allocations, heap metadata corruption and further consequences beyond denial of service may be possible, though only denial of service is demonstrated by the supplied proof of concept.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- Technical severity (medium)+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.
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.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented patch — www.vulncheck.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
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.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Proftpd Proftpd, ProFTPD Project ProFTPD).
- Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
- 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.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proftpd | Proftpd | < 1.3.10 | Vulnerable | NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| ProFTPD Project | ProFTPD | < 1.3.10 | Vulnerable | CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.7 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 7.7 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
| 7.5 | CVSS 3.1 | High | 1.6 | 5.9 | disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 7.5 | CVSS 3.1 | High | — | — | VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
| 6.5 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | 2.8 | 3.6 | nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
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.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · proftpd project/proftpd
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- Fix documented
- CVSS changed · 6.5
- Source status changed · → Analyzed
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
References
3 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- High CVE-2026-63090 ProFTPD mod_sftp Heap Buffer Overflow via SFTP Packet Reassembly Jul 20, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-63091 ProFTPD mod_sftp Signed Integer Overflow via SCP Size-Record Parser Jul 20, 2026
- High CVE-2026-35025 ProFTPD ACL Bypass via /proc/self/root Path Prefix in RNFR Jun 24, 2026
- High CVE-2026-44331 SQL Injection in Proftpd May 5, 2026
- High CVE-2026-42167 SQL Injection in Proftpd Apr 28, 2026
- High CVE-2021-47865 ProFTPD 1.3.7a - Remote Denial of Service Jan 21, 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 FIRST EPSS score.
- 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-2026-53994 is "ProFTPD mod_sftp Heap Buffer Overflow via Unsigned Integer Underflow and Size Truncation", rated Medium. It affects Proftpd (Proftpd); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.5 describes technical severity. 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.