Skip to content

CVE-2026-39979

Out-of-bounds Read: Is CVE-2026-39979 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
6.5 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.6%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-125 · Out-of-bounds Read
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:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L

jq is a command-line JSON processor. In commits before 2f09060afab23fe9390cce7cb860b10416e1bf5f, the jv_parse_sized() API in libjq accepts a counted buffer with an explicit length parameter, but its error-handling path formats the input buffer using %s in jv_string_fmt(), which reads until a NUL terminator is found rather than respecting the caller-supplied length. This means that when malformed JSON is passed in a non-NUL-terminated buffer, the error construction logic performs an out-of-bounds read past the end of the buffer. The vulnerability is reachable by any libjq consumer calling jv_parse_sized() with untrusted input, and depending on memory layout, can result in memory disclosure or process termination. The issue has been patched in commit 2f09060afab23fe9390cce7cb860b10416e1bf5f.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-39979
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-39979/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-39979)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-39979"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-39979/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-39979"></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

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-125 · Out-of-bounds Read.