CVE-2026-21897VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jan 2026Updated 12 Jan 2026

CVE-2026-21897: nasa CryptoLib · Out-of-bounds Write

Affects nasa CryptoLibSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.3 High : upgrade to 1.4.3 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.3High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 20% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.4.3

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to 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 10 Jan 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 2026-10-25.

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 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

Upgrade CryptoLib and nasa/CryptoLib to 1.4.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
nasaCryptoLib	Affected <1.4.3	Fixed in 1.4.3
GitHubnasa/CryptoLib`pkg:github/nasa/CryptoLib`Other threats	Affected <1.4.3	Fixed in 1.4.3

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

The primary mitigation is to upgrade CryptoLib to version 1.4.3 or later, where the boundary check flaw has been corrected. Organizations should audit their software supply chain and embedded systems to identify any use of vulnerable CryptoLib versions. Implement rigorous input validation and boundary checking in custom or dependent code handling GVCID parameters. Conduct thorough testing of cryptographic modules for similar out-of-bounds vulnerabilities. Employ runtime protections such as memory safety tools or address sanitizers during development and testing phases. For deployed systems where immediate upgrade is not feasible, consider isolating affected components from network exposure and monitoring for anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Engage with vendors and partners to ensure timely patch deployment and share threat intelligence related to this vulnerability. Finally, incorporate this vulnerability into risk assessments and incident response plans specific to aerospace and satellite communication environments.

Description

CryptoLib provides a software-only solution using the CCSDS Space Data Link Security Protocol - Extended Procedures (SDLS-EP) to secure communications between a spacecraft running the core Flight System (cFS) and a ground station. Prior to version 1.4.3, the Crypto_Config_Add_Gvcid_Managed_Parameters function only checks whether gvcid_counter > GVCID_MAN_PARAM_SIZE. As a result, it allows up to the 251st entry, which causes a write past the end of the array, overwriting gvcid_counter located immediately after gvcid_managed_parameters_array[250]. This leads to an out-of-bounds write, and the overwritten gvcid_counter may become an arbitrary value, potentially affecting the parameter lookup/registration logic that relies on it. This issue has been patched in version 1.4.3.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those involved in aerospace, satellite communications, and space research, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Compromise of the CryptoLib could lead to unauthorized manipulation or disruption of spacecraft-to-ground communications, potentially causing mission failures, data corruption, or loss of sensitive telemetry and command data. The integrity and availability of critical space communication links could be undermined, affecting satellite operations and related infrastructure. Given the reliance on secure communication protocols in space missions, exploitation could also have cascading effects on dependent systems and services. Although no active exploits are known, the vulnerability's remote exploitability and high severity necessitate prompt attention. Organizations operating or collaborating with space agencies or contractors using the affected CryptoLib versions must consider the risk to their operational continuity and data security.

CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #5
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
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)
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 17 Jan 2026, 07:48 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-787

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats