Skip to content

CVE-2026-34219

Integer Overflow: Is CVE-2026-34219 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-190 · Integer Overflow
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 →
Affected:Protocol

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

libp2p-rust is the official rust language Implementation of the libp2p networking stack. Prior to version 0.49.4, the Rust libp2p Gossipsub implementation contains a remotely reachable panic in backoff expiry handling. After a peer sends a crafted PRUNE control message with an attacker-controlled, near-maximum backoff value, the value is accepted and stored as an Instant near the representable upper bound. On a later heartbeat, the implementation performs unchecked Instant + Duration arithmetic (backoff_time + slack), which can overflow and panic with: overflow when adding duration to instant. This issue is reachable from any Gossipsub peer over normal TCP + Noise + mplex/yamux connectivity and requires no further authentication beyond becoming a protocol peer. This issue has been patched in version 0.49.4.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-34219
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34219/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34219)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34219"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34219/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-34219"></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-190 · Integer Overflow.