CVE-2026-102716

HIGHPre-NVD 8.78.7—
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 8.7 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.3% (15th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). GitHub Security Advisory data not yet ingested — confidence will rise once GHSA publishes (typical lag: hours to days for open-source ecosystem CVEs; never for infrastructure-only CVEs).

Triggered by: NVD CVSS baseline
Sources: epss, secondary
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
8.7EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.3%CVSS: 8.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

An unauthenticated client can drain the RTSP server's packet pool with a couple of dozen requests

that carry a Session header the parser cannot convert.

The Session branch returns the raw NetX error code instead of an RTSP status code:

/* addons/rtsp/nx_rtsp_server.c:2754 */

status = _nx_utility_string_to_uint(field_value_ptr, field_value_length, &session_id);

if (status)

{

return(status); /* NX_INVALID_PARAMETERS / NX_SIZE_ERROR / NX_OVERFLOW */

}

Every other branch of the same function maps its failure to an RTSP status first. The CSeq branch

eighteen lines earlier does exactly that (line 2736 returns NX_RTSP_STATUS_CODE_BAD_REQUEST). The

raw code then reaches _nx_rtsp_server_error_response_send (nx_rtsp_server.c:1234), which does not

recognise it, takes a path that returns without releasing the response packet it already allocated,

and the block never goes back to the pool.

Six requests with an empty Session header against a 22 packet pool:

valid requests:      after request 6: pool available = 21,  AFTER = 22 / 22

malformed requests: after request 6: pool available = 16, AFTER = 17 / 22

One block per request, not returned when the client disconnects. Twenty six requests take the pool

to zero and the server starts failing allocations, after which it serves nobody. If the pool is

shared with the rest of the application, as it is in the shipped sample, the rest of the stack

stops with it.

Convert the _nx_utility_string_to_uint failure in the Session branch into

NX_RTSP_STATUS_CODE_BAD_REQUEST the way the CSeq branch does, and release the response packet on

every exit path of _nx_rtsp_server_error_response_send.

CVSS v3
8.7
EG Score
8.7HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
54
EG Risk 54/100CISA SSVC

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity87% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA SSVC: Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.
EPSS PROB
0.3%
EPSS %ILE
15th
KEV
Not listed

CISA SSVCTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it: high means the affected system is essential to your organisation's mission, or its compromise could cause irreversible harm to people. CISA's decision table

Published

September 29, 2026

Last Modified

September 29, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-102716(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 29× in last 7d / 29× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-05 05:32 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-05 05:32 UTCGHSA enrichment
  3. 2026-10-04 23:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-10-04 18:41 UTCGHSA enrichment
  5. 2026-10-04 07:48 UTCGHSA enrichment
  6. 2026-10-03 20:57 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-03 20:57 UTCGHSA enrichment
  8. 2026-10-03 14:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-10-03 10:07 UTCGHSA enrichment
  10. 2026-10-02 23:16 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-02 23:16 UTCGHSA enrichment
  12. 2026-10-02 12:24 UTCGHSA enrichment
  13. 2026-10-02 01:32 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-02 01:32 UTCGHSA enrichment
  15. 2026-10-01 19:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-10-01 14:42 UTCGHSA enrichment
  17. 2026-10-01 03:51 UTCGHSA enrichment
  18. 2026-09-30 17:01 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-09-30 17:01 UTCGHSA enrichment
  20. 2026-09-30 15:02 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-09-30 06:11 UTCGHSA enrichment
  22. 2026-09-29 19:21 UTCGHSA enrichment
  23. 2026-09-29 19:11 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-09-29 19:10 UTCGHSA enrichment
  25. 2026-09-29 18:51 UTCEG score recompute
Show 4 more
  1. 2026-09-29 18:51 UTCGHSA enrichment
  2. 2026-09-29 18:27 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-09-29 17:49 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-09-29 17:48 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-102716?
CVE-2026-102716 is a high vulnerability published on September 29, 2026. An unauthenticated client can drain the RTSP server's packet pool with a couple of dozen requests that carry a Session header the parser cannot convert. The Session branch returns the raw NetX error code instead of an RTSP status code: Every other branch of the same function maps its failure to an…
When was CVE-2026-102716 disclosed?
CVE-2026-102716 was first published on September 29, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-102716 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-102716 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.3% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (15th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-102716?
CVE-2026-102716 has a CVSS base score of 8.7 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-102716?
No fix for CVE-2026-102716 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-102716 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-102716

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-102716?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.