CVE Intelligence
Medium Memory corruption

CVE-2026-56391 — Out‑of‑bounds Read in GNU coreutils

GNU coreutils uniq is vulnerable to an out‑of‑bounds read due to incorrect handling of multibyte input when the -w (--check-chars) option is used. The find_field() function miscalculates the byte length of characters by repeatedly processing a fixed pointer instead of advancing through the input, resulting in an inflated length value. This incorrect length is later used in a memcmp operation, causing reads beyond the allocated buffer when processing crafted multibyte input. When running GNU coreutils uniq with attacker-provided arguments, this behavior leads to a crash and potential adjacent heap memory exposure. This issue has been fixed in the commit d64e35a8a4c0e4608321433e0d84d917e4e36371.

Published Jul 24, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: CERT-PL

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 (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.

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 15, 2026
Affects
Gnu
Coreutils
CVSS base
6.1
Medium · 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
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
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.

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 (Gnu Coreutils).
  2. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  3. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  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
Gnu Coreutils ≥ 9.5 and ≤ 9.11 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Gnu Coreutils ≥ 9.5 and ≤ 9.11 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
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
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
4.6 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — cvd@cert.pl via NIST National Vulnerability Database
4.6 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — CERT-PL via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
6.1 CVSS 3.1 Medium 1.8 4.2 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-125 · Out-of-bounds Read

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

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

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
  • Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)crash dumps

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · gnu/coreutils
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 6.1
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Jul 24, 2026 · CERT-PL

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

Gnu
every CVE for this vendor
Memory corruption
same class
CWE-125
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-56392 Heap-based Buffer Overflow in GNU coreutils Jul 24, 2026
  • CVE-2024-0684 Coreutils: heap overflow in split --line-bytes with very long lines Feb 6, 2024

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 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-2026-56391 is "Out‑of‑bounds Read in GNU coreutils", rated Medium. It affects Coreutils (Gnu); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.1 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.