CVE-2026-49839

HIGHPre-NVD 7.17.1—
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 7.1 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.1%, top 96% of all CVEs by exploit prediction. 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
7.1EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 7.1Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

jq is a command-line JSON processor. Prior to 1.8.2, jq --rawfile can turn a handled oversized-string error into invalid-state reuse and a real heap out-of-bounds write in assertion-disabled builds. When jv_load_file(raw=1) reads an attacker-controlled file, it repeatedly appends file chunks to the same jv string accumulator. Once jv_string_append_buf() returns jv_invalid_with_msg("String too long"), the raw-file loop does not stop. If the file contains at least one more byte, the next loop iteration appends a new chunk to an object that is already invalid. With assertions enabled this aborts in jvp_string_ptr(). With assertions disabled, the invalid object is interpreted as a string object and ASan reports heap-buffer-overflow. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.8.2.

CVSS v3
7.1
EG Score
7.1HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
37
EG Risk 37/100

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
Severity71% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability30% × 15%
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
5th
KEV
Not listed

Published

June 25, 2026

Last Modified

June 26, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Jun 25, 2026
🔬 Proof of concept available. Patch available. Sources: github.
githubMentions a patch (unverified)🟡 PoC Available

jq --rawfile invalid-state reuse after String too long causes heap-buffer-overflow · Advisory · jqlang/jq · GitHub

https://github.com/jqlang/jq/security/advisories/GHSA-cfh2-vwfq-qfmm

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-49839(2)

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

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatjq-main-1.8.2-0.1.hum12026-06-25redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(7 across 7 ecosystems)
Alpine:v3.22(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq—
  • every version up to 1.8.2-r0: fixed in 1.8.2-r0
—
Alpine:v3.23(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq—
  • every version up to 1.8.2-r0: fixed in 1.8.2-r0
—
Alpine:v3.24(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq—
  • every version up to 1.8.2-r0: fixed in 1.8.2-r0
—
Debian:11(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq1.6-2.1, 1.6-2.1+deb11u1, 1.6-2.1+deb11u2
  • every version up to 1.6-2.1+deb11u3: fixed in 1.6-2.1+deb11u3
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq1.6-2.1, 1.6-2.1+deb12u1
  • every version up to 1.6-2.1+deb12u2: fixed in 1.6-2.1+deb12u2
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq1.7.1-6+deb13u1, 1.7.1-6+deb13u2
  • every version up to 1.7.1-6+deb13u3: fixed in 1.7.1-6+deb13u3
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
jq1.8.0-1 ... 1.8.1-7 (8 versions)
  • every version up to 1.8.1-8: fixed in 1.8.1-8
—

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 6× in last 7d / 28× 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.

Showing the most recent 100 of 215 total refreshes for this CVE.

  1. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-09-26 00:27 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-09-23 17:53 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-09-23 08:44 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-09-23 08:44 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescore
  18. 2026-09-18 07:22 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-09-18 07:22 UTCVendor advisory
  20. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-09-14 01:18 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-09-14 01:18 UTCVendor advisory
  24. 2026-09-13 16:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-09-13 09:38 UTCVendor advisory
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-09-12 15:46 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-09-12 15:46 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-09-11 14:53 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-09-10 09:35 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-09-08 22:01 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-09-07 16:01 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-09-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-09-04 05:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-09-02 14:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-09-01 13:54 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-09-01 04:40 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-08-30 19:32 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-08-30 19:32 UTCVendor advisory
  14. 2026-08-30 19:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-08-30 01:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-08-28 21:41 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-08-27 23:20 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-08-27 23:20 UTCVendor advisory
  19. 2026-08-27 14:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-08-26 14:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-08-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-08-25 01:46 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-08-25 01:46 UTCVendor advisory
  24. 2026-08-24 13:09 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-08-24 13:09 UTCVendor advisory
  26. 2026-08-24 00:03 UTCVendor advisory
  27. 2026-08-23 11:27 UTCEG score recompute
  28. 2026-08-23 11:27 UTCVendor advisory
  29. 2026-08-23 00:19 UTCEPSS rescore
  30. 2026-08-22 22:50 UTCVendor advisory
  31. 2026-08-22 10:13 UTCEG score recompute
  32. 2026-08-22 10:13 UTCVendor advisory
  33. 2026-08-21 23:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  34. 2026-08-21 20:49 UTCVendor advisory
  35. 2026-08-21 08:14 UTCEG score recompute
  36. 2026-08-21 08:14 UTCVendor advisory
  37. 2026-08-20 22:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  38. 2026-08-20 19:38 UTCVendor advisory
  39. 2026-08-20 07:03 UTCEG score recompute
  40. 2026-08-20 07:03 UTCVendor advisory
  41. 2026-08-19 17:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  42. 2026-08-19 14:12 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-08-19 01:22 UTCEG score recompute
  44. 2026-08-19 01:22 UTCVendor advisory
  45. 2026-08-18 13:48 UTCEPSS rescore
  46. 2026-08-17 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  47. 2026-08-17 06:56 UTCVendor advisory
  48. 2026-08-16 18:21 UTCEG score recompute
  49. 2026-08-16 18:21 UTCVendor advisory
  50. 2026-08-16 14:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  51. 2026-08-16 05:03 UTCEG score recompute
  52. 2026-08-16 05:03 UTCVendor advisory
  53. 2026-08-16 02:14 UTCEPSS rescore
  54. 2026-08-15 16:28 UTCVendor advisory
  55. 2026-08-15 03:53 UTCEG score recompute
  56. 2026-08-15 03:53 UTCVendor advisory
  57. 2026-08-15 01:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  58. 2026-08-14 15:18 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-08-14 02:42 UTCEG score recompute
  60. 2026-08-14 02:42 UTCVendor advisory
  61. 2026-08-13 22:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  62. 2026-08-13 14:07 UTCVendor advisory
  63. 2026-08-13 01:22 UTCEG score recompute
  64. 2026-08-13 01:22 UTCVendor advisory
  65. 2026-08-12 13:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  66. 2026-08-12 12:47 UTCVendor advisory
  67. 2026-08-12 00:10 UTCEG score recompute
  68. 2026-08-12 00:10 UTCVendor advisory
  69. 2026-08-11 11:34 UTCEG score recompute
  70. 2026-08-11 11:34 UTCVendor advisory
  71. 2026-08-11 00:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  72. 2026-08-10 22:59 UTCVendor advisory
  73. 2026-08-10 10:23 UTCVendor advisory
  74. 2026-08-09 21:48 UTCEG score recompute
  75. 2026-08-09 21:48 UTCVendor advisory

Related CVEs(same product + same vendor + same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-49839?
CVE-2026-49839 is a high vulnerability published on June 25, 2026. jq is a command-line JSON processor. Prior to 1.8.2, jq --rawfile can turn a handled oversized-string error into invalid-state reuse and a real heap out-of-bounds write in assertion-disabled builds. When jvloadfile(raw=1) reads an attacker-controlled file, it repeatedly appends file chunks to the…
When was CVE-2026-49839 disclosed?
CVE-2026-49839 was first published on June 25, 2026, with the most recent update on June 26, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-49839 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-49839 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (5th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-49839?
CVE-2026-49839 has a CVSS base score of 7.1 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-49839?
A fix for CVE-2026-49839 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-49839 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-49839

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-49839?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs