CVE Intelligence
High

CVE-2026-57159 — PJSIP: SDP parser out-of-bounds write in remote payload-type map maintenance

PJSIP is a free and open source multimedia communication library written in C. Prior to commit 673b978, a remote out-of-bounds read and write can occur in the SDP negotiator when the remote payload-type map maintenance feature is enabled. assign_pt_and_update_map() in pjmedia/src/pjmedia/sdp_neg.c uses payload-type numbers taken from a remote SDP offer or answer to index fixed-size internal tables without sufficient bounds validation, so a crafted remote SDP can cause memory access outside those tables. The practical impact is memory corruption and denial of service; code execution is not demonstrated. This path is only reached when PJMEDIA_SDP_NEG_MAINTAIN_REMOTE_PT_MAP is enabled. The default is disabled, so default builds are not affected; the feature is an interoperability option that integrating products may enable. This issue has been patched via commit 673b978.

Published Sep 4, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 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
  • 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
0.6%
ahead of 47% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Pjsip
Pjproject and 1 more
CVSS base
7.5
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
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
Yes
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

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

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — github.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.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Pjsip Pjproject, Teluu Pjsip).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Pjsip Pjproject version < 673b978aab1fe3ab874247be32c871acc880cbeb Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Teluu Pjsip ≤ 2.17 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

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
8.4 CVSS 4.0 High — — security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.4 CVSS 4.0 High — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High 3.9 3.6 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.

CWE-129

Other CVEs with this weakness →

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 · pjsip/pjproject
    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 · 7.5
    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
    Sep 4, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

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

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Pjsip
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-129
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-84975 PJSIP: TLS server identity (hostname) verification bypass via embedded NUL in certificate SubjectAltName (OpenSSL and GnuTLS backends) 27d
  • CVE-2026-77396 PJSIP: Heap buffer overflow in the AVI parser 27d
  • CVE-2026-57166 PJSIP: Pre-authentication overflow in the telnet CLI error Sep 4, 2026
  • CVE-2026-57162 PJSIP: Stack overflow parsing SDP a=crypto attributes Sep 4, 2026
  • CVE-2026-57164 PJSIP: Heap overflow in the HTTP client Sep 4, 2026
  • CVE-2026-57163 PJSIP: Stack overflow parsing a TLS peer certificate's SubjectAltName in GnuTLS backend Sep 4, 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 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-2026-57159 is "PJSIP: SDP parser out-of-bounds write in remote payload-type map maintenance", rated High. It affects Pjproject (Pjsip); 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 0.60% 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.