Skip to content

CVE-2026-14191

Is CVE-2026-14191 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
PoC (unverified)
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.3%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-129
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

public exploits

links to sources — we don’t host code

Unverified proof-of-concept code has been published. It may or may not be functional — assess before relying on it.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

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

An out-of-bounds heap write exists in the RAR5 recovery-volume (.rev) parser in WinRAR and UnRAR (RecVolumes5::ReadHeader in recvol5.cpp). The RecItems vector is sized only when the first .rev file in a set is processed; subsequent .rev files supply an independent RecNum value that is validated against that file's own TotalCount field but never against the actual size of RecItems. A crafted set of two or more .rev files can therefore write an attacker-controlled 32-bit value (the header's RevCRC field) to RecItems[RecNum] at an attacker-controlled offset up to 65534 * sizeof(RecVolItem) bytes past the allocation, corrupting adjacent heap objects. Triggering requires the victim to run a recovery/test operation on an attacker-supplied .rev set (for example 'unrar t x.part1.rev', WinRAR 'Repair archive', or auto-recovery when extracting a volume set with a missing .rar part). This is the RAR5-path sibling of CVE-2023-40477 (which was fixed in the RAR3 path only in WinRAR 6.23). Fixed in WinRAR / RAR 7.23.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-14191
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-14191/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-14191)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-14191"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-14191/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-14191"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field 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
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-129.