VulnerabilityPublished 25 Feb 2026Updated 27 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-3137: CodeAstro Food Ordering System · Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Affects CodeAstro Food Ordering SystemSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 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 15% 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 25 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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
CodeAstroFood Ordering System	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (1)

cpe:2.3:a:codeastro:food_ordering_system:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-3137, organizations should immediately restrict local access to systems running CodeAstro Food Ordering System 1.0, ensuring only trusted and authorized personnel have login privileges. Implement strict user account controls and monitor local user activities for unusual behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Employ application whitelisting and endpoint protection solutions to detect and block anomalous execution patterns related to buffer overflow exploitation. Conduct regular backups of critical data to enable recovery in case of service disruption. Engage with CodeAstro for updates on patches or security advisories and plan for prompt application of any forthcoming fixes. Additionally, perform code audits or penetration testing focused on local privilege escalation and buffer overflow vectors to identify and remediate similar vulnerabilities proactively.

Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in CodeAstro Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file food_ordering.exe. Such manipulation leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack can only be performed from a local environment. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-3137 is the potential for local attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause denial of service via a stack-based buffer overflow in the food_ordering.exe application. This could lead to application crashes, data corruption, or unauthorized actions within the context of the vulnerable software. For organizations using the CodeAstro Food Ordering System, this vulnerability could disrupt food ordering operations, leading to service outages or loss of customer trust. While the attack requires local access, environments with multiple users or insufficient access controls are at higher risk. The limited impact on confidentiality and integrity suggests that sensitive data exposure or modification is possible but not guaranteed. The absence of remote exploitation reduces the risk of widespread attacks but does not eliminate insider threats or attacks from compromised local accounts. Overall, the vulnerability could affect operational continuity and data integrity in food service environments, potentially causing financial and reputational damage.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…