CVE-2026-2653VulnerabilityPublished 18 Feb 2026Updated 23 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-2653: admesh · Heap-based Buffer Overflow

Affects admeshSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system 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 through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System 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 Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Feb 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 2026-10-26.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
admesh	Affected =0.98.0 =0.98.1 =0.98.2 =0.98.3 =0.98.4 =0.98.5	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Given the absence of official patches, organizations should implement the following mitigations: 1) Restrict local access to systems running admesh to trusted users only, enforcing strict access controls and monitoring. 2) Employ application whitelisting and endpoint detection to identify and block exploitation attempts. 3) Consider isolating admesh usage to dedicated, hardened workstations or virtual machines to limit exposure. 4) Regularly audit and monitor logs for unusual activity related to admesh processes or file manipulations. 5) Explore replacing admesh with actively maintained alternatives that provide similar STL processing capabilities. 6) If feasible, review and patch the source code internally or apply community patches to fix the vulnerability. 7) Educate users about the risks of running untrusted STL files and enforce file integrity checks. 8) Maintain up-to-date backups to recover from potential crashes or compromise. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on access control, monitoring, and architectural isolation tailored to the vulnerability's local attack vector and unmaintained status.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in admesh up to 0.98.5. This issue affects the function stl_check_normal_vector of the file src/normals.c. Performing a manipulation results in heap-based buffer overflow. The attack must be initiated from a local position. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. It looks like this product is not really maintained anymore.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-2653 is potential memory corruption leading to application crashes or limited arbitrary code execution on systems running vulnerable versions of admesh. Since exploitation requires local access, remote compromise is unlikely unless combined with other vulnerabilities or social engineering. Organizations relying on admesh for 3D model processing or manufacturing workflows could experience denial of service or unauthorized code execution if an attacker gains local access. This could disrupt production pipelines or lead to further system compromise. The lack of maintenance and absence of patches increases the risk over time, especially as exploit code is publicly available. While the vulnerability does not directly affect network-facing services, insider threats or attackers with initial footholds could leverage this flaw to escalate privileges or maintain persistence. Overall, the impact is moderate but significant in environments where admesh is a critical component of operational technology or engineering toolchains.

Summary

CVE-2026-2653 identifies a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the open-source software admesh, versions 0.98.0 through 0.98.5. The flaw resides in the stl_check_normal_vector function of the src/normals.c source file, which processes STL (stereolithography) file normal vectors. Improper handling of input data allows an attacker with local access to manipulate the input to cause a heap overflow, potentially corrupting memory. This can lead to application crashes or, in some cases, arbitrary code execution depending on the environment and exploitation technique. The vulnerability requires low privileges (local access) and no user interaction, making it moderately easy to exploit if an attacker has local system access. The product is reportedly no longer maintained, and no official patches or updates have been released to address this issue. Public exploit code has been released, increasing the risk of exploitation by malicious actors. The vulnerability's CVSS 4.8 score reflects its medium severity, considering the local attack vector and limited scope of impact. Admesh is commonly used in 3D modeling and manufacturing workflows, often on engineering workstations and build servers, which may be targeted for disruption or further compromise.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…