Is CVE-2026-12549 exploitable?

No community verdicts yet for CVE-2026-12549. Be the first to weigh in.

Is CVE-2026-12549 a false positive?

No community verdicts yet for CVE-2026-12549.

How do I remediate CVE-2026-12549?

See the authoritative references (NVD, vendor advisory) and community field notes on this page for remediation guidance.

CVE-2026-12549

is CVE-2026-12549real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

☆ Watch

Medium · CVSS 4.8EPSS 0.3%CWE-805

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L

The fix for CVE-2026-2443 was regressed by a subsequent rework commit that replaced specific overflow checks with a general signed comparison. When a client sends a Range request with a suffix length exceeding the content size, the resulting negative start value is not properly clamped, leading to malformed HTTP 206 responses and log flooding.

References

NVD MITRE CVE.org

Published Jun 22, 2026

Embed this verdict

Markdown

[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12549/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12549)

HTML

<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12549"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12549/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-12549"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

0 verdicts

Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

Add a field note or remediationoptional