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).
- •High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.5%CVSS: 9.1Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed
Upgrade to Data::Intern::Shared 0.02 or later, which bounds the slot id, the reverse offset and the record length before each dereference and caps the hash-slot probe (from the CVE record's solution, CPAN Security Group) — apply it.
Data::Intern::Shared versions before 0.02 for Perl allow an out-of-bounds read via unvalidated slot, reverse and arena indices in si_idx_find.
The attach-time validator si_validate_header is thorough about the header and layout (magic, version, section offsets, total_size, count and arena_used) but does not validate the three arrays it then trusts. Every lookup in si_idx_find walks a triple indirection read straight from the mmap'd segment, arena[reverse[slots[i].id]], with no bound on slots[i].id against count, on the reverse[id] arena offset against arena_used, or on the arena record's length prefix.
A local peer that can write the backing file can leave the header valid while poisoning a slot id, a reverse offset or an arena length prefix, so an id_of, intern or string lookup dereferences the chain out of bounds; because string() returns a file-controlled length of bytes from the arena, adjacent process memory can be disclosed.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Upgrade to Data::Intern::Shared 0.02 or later, which bounds the slot id, the reverse offset and the record length before each dereference and caps the hash-slot probe (from the CVE record's solution, CPAN Security Group). Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (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