Skip to content

CVE-2026-32874

Is CVE-2026-32874 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
7.5 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.5%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-401
CWE

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

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Officially disputed

The CVE record itself is disputed or rejected upstream — a strong candidate for a false positive in scanners. Confirm with a verdict.

Based on NVD record status

Confirm or dispute →

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

UltraJSON is a fast JSON encoder and decoder written in pure C with bindings for Python 3.7+. Versions 5.4.0 through 5.11.0 contain an accumulating memory leak in JSON parsing large (outside of the range [-2^63, 2^64 - 1]) integers. The leaked memory is a copy of the string form of the integer plus an additional NULL byte. The leak occurs irrespective of whether the integer parses successfully or is rejected due to having more than sys.get_int_max_str_digits() digits, meaning that any sized leak per malicious JSON can be achieved provided that there is no limit on the overall size of the payload. Any service that calls ujson.load()/ujson.loads()/ujson.decode() on untrusted inputs is affected and vulnerable to denial of service attacks. This issue has been fixed in version 5.12.0.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-32874
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32874/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32874)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32874"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-32874/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-32874"></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

    This scores high on paper (CVSS 7.5) but the real-world signal is low. It is not in CISA KEV and no public exploit was found, and near-term exploitation looks unlikely (EPSS about 0%). Verify your own exposure before treating it as urgent. It is reachable over the network with no authentication and no user interaction, which is the most dangerous profile. Not an emergency for most teams, but patch it in your normal cycle and check whether the affected component is actually exposed in your setup.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-401.