Skip to content

CVE-2026-49844

Is CVE-2026-49844 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.
0.7%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-116
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:H/A:N

Improper encoding of non-finite floating-point values during MapMessage JSON serialization in Apache Log4j API produces output that is not valid JSON. This issue affects Apache Log4j API versions 2.13.1 through 2.25.4 and version 2.26.0. The fix for CVE-2026-34481 did not cover all code paths: when a MapMessage contains a non-finite IEEE 754 value (NaN, Infinity, or -Infinity), MapMessage.asJson() emits the corresponding bare token. RFC 8259 does not permit these tokens, so a conformant parser rejects the resulting document. The defect is reachable only when both of the following conditions hold: * The application uses the message resolver https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/json-template-layout.html#event-template-resolver-message of JsonTemplateLayout or any other layout that relies on MapMessage.asJson() or MapMessage.getFormattedMessage(new String[]{"JSON"}). * The application logs a MapMessage that contains an attacker-controlled floating-point value. An attacker who can supply a non-finite value can cause the affected layout to emit malformed JSON, which may corrupt the enclosing log record or disrupt downstream log ingestion and parsing. Users are advised to upgrade to Apache Log4j API 2.25.5 or 2.26.1, both of which emit RFC 8259-compliant JSON for non-finite values.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-49844
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49844/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49844)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49844"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49844/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-49844"></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-116.