CVE-2026-0954
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThere is a memory corruption vulnerability due to an out-of-bounds write when loading a corrupted DSB file in Digilent DASYLab. This vulnerability may result in information disclosure or arbitrary code execution. Successful exploitation requires an attacker to get a user to open a specially crafted .DSB file. This vulnerability affects all versions of Digilent DASYLab.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceMemory corruption vulnerability due to an out-of-bounds write when Digilent DASYLab parses corrupted .DSB files. The lack of bounds checking during DSB file loading allows writing beyond allocated buffer boundaries, potentially enabling information disclosure or arbitrary code execution when a user opens a specially crafted file.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm Ni Dasylab installationCheck for the presence of the Ni Dasylab application in Program Files (typically C:\Program Files\National Instruments\DASYLAB) or look for dasylab.exe via system searchAffected if Ni Dasylab executable is found on the system, making the DSB parsing component present
-
Identify DSB file parser moduleLook for the DSB file handling DLL or module within the DASYLAB installation directory, typically in the program folder or a subfolder named after the versionAffected if The DSB parsing module exists in the installation directory, indicating the vulnerable code is present
-
Check for DSB file associationExamine Windows registry under HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT for .DSB file extension associations, or check if .DSB files are recognized by the system as DASYLab documentsAffected if The .DSB file extension is registered to open with DASYLab, meaning the application will parse these files when opened
-
Detect recent DSB file activityReview Windows prefetch files, recent documents, or application event logs for evidence of .DSB files being opened or processed by DASYLabAffected if A user has recently opened a .DSB file with DASYLab, triggering the vulnerable parsing code
The environment is affected if Ni Dasylab is installed with the DSB file parser module and the system processes or is configured to open .DSB files, since all versions of Ni Dasylab contain the vulnerability.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUntil an official patch is available, users should avoid opening .DSB files from untrusted sources. Organizations may consider implementing application whitelisting or sandboxing to mitigate risk from malicious file imports. Input validation and fuzzing of the DSB parser should be performed if patching is undertaken.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0954 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-0954 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data