Skip to content

CVE-2026-32134

NULL Pointer Dereference: Is CVE-2026-32134 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
5.9 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.4%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-476 · NULL Pointer Dereference
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

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

NanoMQ MQTT Broker (NanoMQ) is an all-around Edge Messaging Platform. In versions 0.24.10 and below, when NanoMQ handles high-concurrency reconnect traffic using a reconnect-collision payload, the broker can crash due to a NULL pointer dereference during MQTT session resumption for clean_start=0 clients. The transport's p_peer callback (tcptran_pipe_peer()) iterates cpipe->subinfol while copying session metadata from the cached old pipe to the new reconnecting pipe, without checking whether the pointer is NULL. Under a reconnect race, cpipe->subinfol can be freed and set to NULL before session restore invokes this function, resulting in a remote unauthenticated Denial-of-Service (process crash) condition. This issue has been fixed in version 0.24.11.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-32134
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32134/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32134)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32134"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32134/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-32134"></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
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

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.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-476 · NULL Pointer Dereference.