Skip to content

CVE-2026-49943

Is CVE-2026-49943 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
6.3 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.3%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-121
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:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H

CZ.NIC BIRD Internet Routing Daemon through 2.19.0 contains a stack-based buffer overflow in the BGP AS_PATH mask matching implementation in nest/a-path.c. The as_path_match() function uses a fixed-size stack array of 2048 + 1 pm_pos entries, while parse_path() expands AS_PATH segments from a received BGP UPDATE without enforcing a corresponding capacity limit. When RFC 8654 BGP Extended Messages are enabled and a BIRD filter evaluates an AS path mask expression such as "bgp_path ~ [= ... =]", an established BGP peer can send a long AS_PATH containing more than 2048 expanded ASNs. This causes parse_path()/as_path_match() to write beyond the fixed stack buffer, resulting in a crash of the daemon. NOTE: reportedly, the Supplier's position is that a fix is not being prioritized because all network operators should already be rejecting routes with unusually long attributes.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-49943
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49943/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49943)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49943"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-49943/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-49943"></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-121.