FreeRDP is a free implementation of the Remote Desktop Protocol. Prior to 3.27.0, rpc_client_recv_fragment in libfreerdp/core/gateway/rpc_client.c ensures the response reassembly stream capacity using only the server-declared alloc_hint rather than the actual StubLength about to be written. A malicious TS Gateway can send a PTYPE_RESPONSE with a small alloc_hint and a much larger frag_length, causing Stream_Write to copy attacker-controlled stub data beyond the 4096-byte pdu->s buffer. This can crash the client and may permit code execution through heap corruption. This issue is fixed in version 3.27.0.
CVE-2026-55194
“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.
This critical-severity CVE scores 9.8 under NVD CVSS v3. EPSS exploit probability: 0.6% (48th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.
- CISA's Vulnrichment rates exploitation as PoC; EchelonGraph holds no exploit-code reference for it
A fix is available — apply it.
- CVSS v3
- 9.8
- EG Score
- 9.8CRITICALmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 60EG Risk 60/100
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 (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity98% × 45%The EG Score, 9.8 of 10.Exploitation40% × 40%EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.Automatability0% × 15%CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high. - EPSS PROB
- 0.6%
- EPSS %ILE
- 48th
- KEV
- Not listed
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
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 no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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
August 19, 2026
Last Modified
September 24, 2026
Advisory Details (4)
Auto-updated Oct 8, 2026Heap-buffer-overflow write in TS Gateway RPC RESPONSE reassembly due to alloc_hint capacity mismatch · Advisory · FreeRDP/FreeRDP · GitHub
https://github.com/FreeRDP/FreeRDP/security/advisories/GHSA-9gxm-3mf5-f5cx3.27.0
Patch available: FreeRDP/FreeRDP 3.27.0
https://github.com/FreeRDP/FreeRDP/releases/tag/3.27.0Bounds fixes
Fix merged in FreeRDP/FreeRDP PR #12873 on 2026-06-11 — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/FreeRDP/FreeRDP/pull/12873commit 9f2da52c2341 (FreeRDP/FreeRDP)
Fix landed in FreeRDP/FreeRDP commit 9f2da52c2341 — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/FreeRDP/FreeRDP/commit/9f2da52c2341cc14a96ad12e69c5b83d0bcd8b5aVendor Advisories for CVE-2026-55194(9)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
- RHSA-2026:71390Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:68707Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:68706Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:66282Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:66281Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:65855Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:62571Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- RHSA-2026:61378Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: freerdp security update
- +1 more
Patch Availability(12)
| Vendor / Ecosystem | Fix (by version range) / Patch | Released | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| ubuntu | winpr3-utils (3.30.0+dfsg-0ubuntu0.26.04.1) @ resolute | 2026-10-08 | ubuntu |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.11.2-1.el9_4.11 | 2026-09-24 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.4.1-6.el9_2.12 | 2026-09-24 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.11.7-1.el9_6.13 | 2026-09-24 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:3.10.3-3.el10_0.16 | 2026-09-17 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-0:2.1.1-5.el7_9.12 | 2026-09-17 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.2.0-12.el8_8.11 | 2026-09-10 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.2.0-7.el8_6.12 | 2026-09-10 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.2.0-14.el8_4.3 | 2026-09-09 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.11.7-12.el8_10 | 2026-09-02 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:2.11.7-7.el9_8.6 | 2026-08-31 | redhat |
| redhat | freerdp-2:3.10.3-12.el10_2.10 | 2026-08-31 | redhat |
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
(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| freerdp2 | 2.10.0+dfsg1-1 ... 2.11.7+dfsg1-6~deb12u1 (13 versions) |
| — |
Debian:13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| freerdp3 | 3.15.0+dfsg-2.1 ... 3.32.0+dfsg-1 (47 versions) |
| — |
Debian:14(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| freerdp3 | 3.15.0+dfsg-2.1 ... 3.26.0+dfsg-1~bpo13+1 (33 versions) |
| — |
Weakness Classification(1)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Additional Vendor Advisories
(3)
Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 18× in last 7d / 128× 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.
Showing the most recent 100 of 224 refreshes on record for this CVE.
A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 124 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.
- 2026-10-14 01:56 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-14 01:56 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-12 22:13 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-12 22:13 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-12 15:56 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-12 06:54 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 19:39 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 16:54 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 14:17 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-08 07:41 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-08 07:41 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-07 10:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 05:20 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-07 01:17 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 21:21 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 16:58 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-06 16:58 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
Show 75 moreShow fewer
- 2026-10-06 12:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-06 07:57 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 17:44 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-05 17:44 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-10-05 13:53 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 09:32 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 05:36 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-05 01:45 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-05 01:45 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-10-04 21:24 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 14:41 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 10:22 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 06:31 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-04 02:41 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-03 20:48 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-03 16:55 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 16:55 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-10-03 05:28 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-03 01:37 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-02 21:36 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-02 21:36 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-10-02 16:47 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-02 12:57 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-02 07:31 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-02 03:41 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-01 22:46 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-01 22:46 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-10-01 13:30 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-01 09:39 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-01 05:43 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-01 01:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-30 20:35 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-30 20:35 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-09-30 08:43 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-30 08:43 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-29 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-09-29 05:58 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-29 02:07 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-28 21:42 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-28 21:42 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-09-28 11:53 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-28 07:53 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-28 04:02 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-28 00:11 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-27 20:00 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-27 16:09 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-27 16:09 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-09-27 11:00 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-27 06:55 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-27 06:55 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
- 2026-09-25 12:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-25 08:32 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-25 04:42 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-25 00:51 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-24 19:44 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-24 15:30 UTCEG score recompute▲ 1.10
- 2026-09-24 15:30 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-24 15:28 UTCNVD updateCVSS v3 → 9.8 · severity → CRITICAL
- 2026-09-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-09-24 03:15 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-24 03:15 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 39th percentile
- 2026-09-23 14:54 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-23 02:32 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-23 02:32 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-09-22 14:10 UTCVendor advisory
Related CVEs(same product + same vendor + same CWE)
Same product
10 shownDebian:13:freerdp3
Same vendor
10 shownredhat:RHSA-2026:61378 · redhat:RHSA-2026:68706
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2026-55194?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-55194 published?
Is CVE-2026-55194 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-55194?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-55194?
Dependency Blast Radius
See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-55194
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-55194?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.