VulnerabilityPublished 23 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-1940: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 · Out-of-bounds Read

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10Source CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-47778

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.1Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 23 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10gstreamer1	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6gstreamer	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7gstreamer	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7gstreamer1	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8gstreamer1	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8mingw-gstreamer1	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-1940, organizations should: 1) Apply official patches from Red Hat as soon as they become available to ensure the incomplete fix is corrected. 2) Audit and restrict local user access to systems running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10, especially those processing untrusted or user-supplied WAV files. 3) Implement strict input validation and sanitization for multimedia files before processing to reduce the risk of triggering the vulnerability. 4) Monitor system logs and application behavior for crashes or anomalies related to GStreamer or WAV file parsing. 5) Consider deploying application-level sandboxing or containerization for multimedia processing services to limit the impact of potential exploitation. 6) Keep GStreamer and related multimedia libraries up to date and review any custom patches or third-party plugins that might interact with WAV parsing. 7) Educate system administrators and developers about the importance of accounting for alignment and rounding in buffer size calculations to prevent similar issues.

Description

An incomplete fix for CVE-2024-47778 allows an out-of-bounds read in gst_wavparse_adtl_chunk() function. The patch added a size validation check lsize + 8 > size, but it does not account for the GST_ROUND_UP_2(lsize) used in the actual offset calculation. When lsize is an odd number, the parser advances more bytes than validated, causing OOB read.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-1940 is an out-of-bounds read vulnerability that can compromise system integrity and availability. Although it does not directly affect confidentiality, the OOB read could cause application crashes or undefined behavior, potentially leading to denial of service conditions. In environments where multimedia processing is critical, such as media servers, streaming platforms, or systems that automatically process audio files, this vulnerability could be exploited to disrupt services. Since the attack vector is local, an attacker would need access to the system to trigger the vulnerability, limiting remote exploitation. However, in multi-user or shared environments, a local attacker could leverage this flaw to destabilize the system or escalate further attacks. The vulnerability's medium severity reflects this moderate risk. Organizations relying on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 for critical infrastructure or services that handle WAV files should consider this vulnerability a notable risk to system stability and integrity.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 24 Mar 2026, 00:10 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats