Skip to content

CVE-2026-59146

Out-of-bounds Read: Is CVE-2026-59146 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
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
n/a
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.

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

Data::SpatialHash::Shared versions before 0.02 for Perl allow out-of-bounds reads and writes via unvalidated bucket, link and free-list indices in sph_walk_cell and sph_alloc_slot. The attach-time validator sph_validate_header checks the header scalars and region layout against the file size, but does not validate the array contents it then trusts. sph_walk_cell reads entries[buckets[b]] and follows each entry's next link raw, and sph_alloc_slot writes through a file-stored free_head index, none bounded against the entry count (max_entries). A local peer that can write the backing file can leave the header valid while poisoning the bucket chain and free list, so a query reads through an out-of-bounds bucket and next index and an insert writes through an out-of-bounds free-list head, corrupting memory or crashing the process.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-59146
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-59146/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-59146)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-59146"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-59146/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-59146"></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.