Skip to content

CVE-2026-34826

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption: Is CVE-2026-34826 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
5.3 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.4%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-400 · Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
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:Rack

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

Rack is a modular Ruby web server interface. Prior to versions 2.2.23, 3.1.21, and 3.2.6, Rack::Utils.get_byte_ranges parses the HTTP Range header without limiting the number of individual byte ranges. Although the existing fix for CVE-2024-26141 rejects ranges whose total byte coverage exceeds the file size, it does not restrict the count of ranges. An attacker can supply many small overlapping ranges such as 0-0,0-0,0-0,... to trigger disproportionate CPU, memory, I/O, and bandwidth consumption per request. This results in a denial of service condition in Rack file-serving paths that process multipart byte range responses. This issue has been patched in versions 2.2.23, 3.1.21, and 3.2.6.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-34826
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34826/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34826)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34826"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-34826/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-34826"></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-400 · Uncontrolled Resource Consumption.