GHSA-29RM-WVWW-5GJV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-05 12:31 – Updated: 2026-08-05 12:31
VLAI
Details

nanoMODBUS through v1.23.0 contains an out-of-bounds write in the Modbus server-side handle_read_file_record() function (FC 0x14, Read File Record) in nanomodbus.c. The function validates that the total request size does not exceed 245 bytes and that each sub-request's record_length is at most 124, but it never validates the CUMULATIVE response size across all sub-requests before processing them. The accumulator response_data_size is declared as uint8_t and is incremented by 2 + record_length*2 for each of up to 35 sub-requests; with 35 sub-requests of record_length=124, the cumulative demand is 8750 bytes, which overflows the uint8_t accumulator. A subsequent loop then calls get_n(), an internal function with no bounds checking, once per sub-request to obtain a pointer into the 260-byte msg.buf receive buffer and advances the internal buf_idx by up to 248 bytes per call; swap_regs() then writes to that pointer unconditionally. A single crafted FC 0x14 request from an unauthenticated network client can cause up to ~8490 bytes to be written out of bounds past the 260-byte buffer, corrupting adjacent memory in the server process and leading to denial of service or potential remote code execution, particularly on embedded/bare-metal targets without memory protection.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-71254"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-787"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-08-05T12:18:57Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "nanoMODBUS through v1.23.0 contains an out-of-bounds write in the Modbus server-side handle_read_file_record() function (FC 0x14, Read File Record) in nanomodbus.c. The function validates that the total request size does not exceed 245 bytes and that each sub-request\u0027s record_length is at most 124, but it never validates the CUMULATIVE response size across all sub-requests before processing them. The accumulator response_data_size is declared as uint8_t and is incremented by 2 + record_length*2 for each of up to 35 sub-requests; with 35 sub-requests of record_length=124, the cumulative demand is 8750 bytes, which overflows the uint8_t accumulator. A subsequent loop then calls get_n(), an internal function with no bounds checking, once per sub-request to obtain a pointer into the 260-byte msg.buf receive buffer and advances the internal buf_idx by up to 248 bytes per call; swap_regs() then writes to that pointer unconditionally. A single crafted FC 0x14 request from an unauthenticated network client can cause up to ~8490 bytes to be written out of bounds past the 260-byte buffer, corrupting adjacent memory in the server process and leading to denial of service or potential remote code execution, particularly on embedded/bare-metal targets without memory protection.",
  "id": "GHSA-29rm-wvww-5gjv",
  "modified": "2026-08-05T12:31:33Z",
  "published": "2026-08-05T12:31:33Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-71254"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/debevv/nanoMODBUS"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/debevv/nanoMODBUS/blob/master/nanomodbus.c"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…