CVE-2026-111441

HIGHPre-NVD 8.18.1
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 8.1 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-10-19. A secondary CVSS source baseline 8.1; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
8.1EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 8.1Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

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

The CVE record's CNA (openGauss Community) lists openGauss-server versions 7.0.0-LTS as unaffected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.

在 openGauss-server 的 src/gausskernel/cbb/utils/hll/hll.cpp 中，内置函数 HllObjectUnpack() 存在长度校验缺陷。该函数从用户提供的 packed HLL 解析 lenUsed 与 lenTotal 后，仅检查输入长度足以覆盖 HLL_HEAD_SIZE + lenUsed，随后按 lenTotal 分配缓冲区、按 lenUsed 调用 memcpy_s() 拷贝输入，既未校验 lenTotal >= lenUsed，也将 memcpy_s() 目标大小写成 lenUsed 而非实际分配的 lenTotal，导致安全拷贝无法拦截越界写。hll_in()、hll_print()、hll_cardinality() 等 SQL 入口会走同一解包路径。因此，普通数据库连接用户只需构造 lenTotal 小于 lenUsed 的畸形 packed HLL（例如经 ::hll 进入 hll_in()），即可触发服务端堆越界写，存在内存破坏风险。此问题随 packed HLL 解包函数 HllObjectUnpack() 进入代码，v2.1.0 起即存在。受影响版本包括 2.1.0、3.0.x、3.1.x、5.0.x、5.1.0、6.0.x，以及 7.0.0-RC1、7.0.0-RC2、7.0.0-RC3。该问题已在 7.0.0-LTS 版本修复，通过在 HllObjectUnpack() 中补齐 lenUsed <= lenTotal 校验，并将 memcpy_s() 的目标大小改为实际分配的 lenTotal。修复 PR 见 https://gitcode.com/opengauss/openGauss-server/pull/9380 。

CVSS v3
8.1
EG Score
8.1HIGHhigh confidence
EG Risk
37
EG Risk 37/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity81% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
33rd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (8.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
8.1 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-19). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.

No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 19, 2026

Last Modified

October 19, 2026

References (1)

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-111441(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 13× in last 7d / 13× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. 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. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  2. 2026-10-22 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  3. 2026-10-21 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  4. 2026-10-20 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  5. 2026-10-19 21:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-8rj5-vp35-h5mx · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
  6. 2026-10-19 18:26 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-19 18:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-8rj5-vp35-h5mx · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
  8. 2026-10-19 17:48 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-19 17:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-8rj5-vp35-h5mx · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
  10. 2026-10-19 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 33rd percentile
  11. 2026-10-19 03:26 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-19 02:33 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 8.1 HIGH
  13. 2026-10-19 02:33 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-111441?
CVE-2026-111441 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 19, 2026. 在 openGauss-server 的 src/gausskernel/cbb/utils/hll/hll.cpp 中，内置函数 HllObjectUnpack() 存在长度校验缺陷。该函数从用户提供的 packed HLL 解析 lenUsed 与 lenTotal 后，仅检查输入长度足以覆盖 HLLHEADSIZE + lenUsed，随后按 lenTotal 分配缓冲区、按 lenUsed 调用 memcpys() 拷贝输入，既未校验 lenTotal >= lenUsed，也将 memcpys() 目标大小写成 lenUsed 而非实际分配的…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-111441 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-111441 was published on October 19, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 19, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-111441 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-111441 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (33rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-111441?
CVE-2026-111441 has a CVSS base score of 8.1 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-111441?
No fix for CVE-2026-111441 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 CVE record's CNA (openGauss Community) lists openGauss-server versions 7.0.0-LTS as unaffected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-111441 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-111441

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-111441?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs