CVE-2026-48487VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 29 Oct 2026

record payload readers · zeroconf: Unvalidated rdlength

Affects esphomeSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 2026.5.1 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 07:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

Patch: Available – fixed in 2026.5.1

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 Aug 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 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

Upgrade esphome to 2026.5.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewesphome`pkg:brew/esphome`Other threats	Affected >=2022.1.2 <2026.5.1	Fixed in 2026.5.1

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

Description

### Impact `_read_character_string` and `_read_string` in `src/zeroconf/_protocol/incoming.py` sliced `self.data[self.offset : self.offset + length]` and advanced `self.offset` by the declared `length` without checking it against `self._data_len`. Python's slice silently returns fewer bytes when the end index runs past the buffer, so a record whose 16-bit RDLENGTH (RFC 1035 §3.2.1) over-advertised by tens of kilobytes was constructed from a truncated payload, appended to `DNSIncoming._answers`, and committed to the cache before any later parse failure surfaced. The follow-up `_read_name` for the next record then failed, but the corrupt record had already entered the answer list and propagated to `DNSCache` and `ServiceInfo`. Any unauthenticated host on the local link (UDP/5353, `224.0.0.251` / `ff02::fb`) can multicast a single mDNS response carrying a TXT, HINFO, or A/AAAA record that advertises rdlength=65535 and only a handful of real payload bytes; consumers calling `ServiceInfo.properties` then parse the truncated bytes as if they matched the wire, and downstream integrations (Home Assistant and other zeroconf-driven discovery) trust the decoded record. The bug is parser-state desync rather than RCE, but it seeds the cache with attacker-shaped key/value and address records for a TTL window and is a building block for higher-impact chains. The impact is likely lower than the other recently released advisories as there is no additional risk of OOM so the severity was manually set to low to override the score CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N (6.5, Medium) since that doesn't fully consider the mDNS threat model. ### Patches Fixed in `zeroconf` 0.149.16 ([PR #1756](https://github.com/python-zeroconf/python-zeroconf/pull/1756)). Note that this change originally intended to ship in 0.149.13 but we ran out of space on PyPI: see https://github.com/python-zeroconf/python-zeroconf/issues/1769 Upgrade to `>= 0.149.16`. ### Workarounds There is no in-process workaround; upgrading is the fix. Otherwise, restrict mDNS (UDP/5353) to trusted Layer-2 segments via AP client isolation, guest-network separation, or host firewall rules. ### Resources - [PR #1756](https://github.com/python-zeroconf/python-zeroconf/pull/1756), fix - [Issue #1752](https://github.com/python-zeroconf/python-zeroconf/issues/1752), public tracking issue - [RFC 1035 §3.2.1](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1035#section-3.2.1), [RFC 1035 §3.3](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1035#section-3.3), [CWE-130](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/130.html)

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…