CVE Intelligence
High Denial of service

CVE-2026-89425 — UTF8DataInputJsonParser._reportInvalidToken() in FasterXML jackson-core builds the…

UTF8DataInputJsonParser._reportInvalidToken() in FasterXML jackson-core builds the offending-token text for its error message by appending Java identifier characters to a StringBuilder in a loop that has no upper bound. Unlike the three sibling parser implementations, including UTF8StreamJsonParser, it never consults ErrorReportConfiguration.getMaxErrorTokenLength() (default 256). A malformed token supplied to a parser created through JsonFactory.createParser(DataInput) is therefore accumulated in full. No StreamReadConstraints setting mitigates this: maxDocumentLength cannot be applied to DataInput sources at all, and maxStringLength does not cover this path because the accumulation bypasses ReadConstrainedTextBuffer. The reporter measured a 20,000,109-character exception message from a 20-million-character malformed token on the DataInput path, against 367 characters for identical input on the InputStream path. Scaling the payload drives the StringBuilder, which also incurs byte-to-char expansion and internal array doubling, to many times the raw payload size and can trigger OutOfMemoryError for the whole JVM. UTF8DataInputJsonParser was introduced in 2.8.0 together with createParser(DataInput); releases before 2.8.0 do not contain the affected class.

Published Sep 23, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database · CNA: 36c7be3b-2937-45df-85ea-ca7133ea542c

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
  • Technical severity (high)+6

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
—
No EPSS score.
Affects
—
Affected products not yet identified by the sources.
CVSS base
7.5
High · 1 source(s)

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. Affected products have not been identified by the sources yet: follow the vendor advisory and map candidate assets by component name.
  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 (denial of service), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Affected products not yet identified by the sources.

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 36c7be3b-2937-45df-85ea-ca7133ea542c 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: 36c7be3b-2937-45df-85ea-ca7133ea542c)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-400 · Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

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).
  • Track CPU/memory spikes and availability drops correlated with request patterns.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSresource metrics

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.5
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Sep 23, 2026 · 36c7be3b-2937-45df-85ea-ca7133ea542c

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

Denial of service
same class
CWE-400
other pages naming this weakness

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 affected product/version with evidence in the sources.
  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No CISA SSVC assessment.
  • 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-2026-89425 is "UTF8DataInputJsonParser._reportInvalidToken() in FasterXML jackson-core builds the…", rated High. Affected products have not been identified by the sources yet. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.5 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.