CVE-2026-39979

MEDIUMNVD 6.56.5Elevated

6.5EG

EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).

CISA's Vulnrichment rates exploitation as PoC; EchelonGraph holds no exploit-code reference for it

CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.8%CVSS: 6.5Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

jq is a command-line JSON processor. In commits before 2f09060afab23fe9390cce7cb860b10416e1bf5f, the jv_parse_sized() API in libjq accepts a counted buffer with an explicit length parameter, but its error-handling path formats the input buffer using %s in jv_string_fmt(), which reads until a NUL terminator is found rather than respecting the caller-supplied length. This means that when malformed JSON is passed in a non-NUL-terminated buffer, the error construction logic performs an out-of-bounds read past the end of the buffer. The vulnerability is reachable by any libjq consumer calling jv_parse_sized() with untrusted input, and depending on memory layout, can result in memory disclosure or process termination. The issue has been patched in commit 2f09060afab23fe9390cce7cb860b10416e1bf5f.

CVSS v3: 6.5
EG Score: 6.5MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk: 60
EPSS PROB: 0.8%
EPSS %ILE: 56th
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 (6.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 6.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity: 6.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v3 · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood: 0.8% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-17). 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 low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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 low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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

April 13, 2026

Last Modified

July 15, 2026