CVE-2026-5265

MEDIUMPre-NVD 6.56.5Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-25420 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-whr7-6788-jg2p (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

6.5EG

EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).

Lower severity and no public exploit yet

CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.6%CVSS: 6.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

When generating an ICMP Destination Unreachable or Packet Too Big response, the handler copies a portion of the original packet into the ICMP error body using the IP header's self-declared total length (ip_tot_len for IPv4, ip6_plen for IPv6) without validating it against the actual packet buffer size. A VM can send a short packet with an inflated IP length field that triggers an ICMP error (e.g., by hitting a reject ACL), causing ovn-controller to read heap memory beyond the valid packet data and include it in the ICMP response sent back to the VM.

CVSS v3: 6.5
EG Score: 6.5MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk: 30
EPSS PROB: 0.6%
EPSS %ILE: 50th
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.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood: 0.6% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-26). 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.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

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

April 24, 2026

Last Modified

October 26, 2026