CVE-2026-0955
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 read when loading a corrupted 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 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 confidenceA memory corruption vulnerability exists in Digilent DASYLab due to an out-of-bounds read when parsing specially crafted files. This could allow an attacker to read sensitive memory contents or achieve arbitrary code execution by tricking a user into opening a malicious 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.
-
Verify Ni Dasylab installationCheck if Ni Dasylab is installed on the system by looking for the application in installed programs or searching for DASYLab-related executables and directoriesAffected if Ni Dasylab is present on the system
-
Confirm affected version rangeDetermine the installed version of Ni Dasylab by checking the application version information (typically available in the program's About or Help section, or in the Windows Programs and Features list)Affected if Any version of Ni Dasylab is installed, as all versions are affected according to the provided data
-
Assess file handling exposureReview whether the system has the ability to open external or third-party data files within Ni Dasylab, as the vulnerability is triggered during file parsingAffected if Ni Dasylab can parse external files and those files originate from untrusted or unknown sources
-
Identify recent file activityCheck for recently opened or imported files in Ni Dasylab that may have been obtained from untrusted sourcesAffected if A user has opened a specially crafted malicious file in Ni Dasylab
A system is affected if Ni Dasylab is installed and a user opens a maliciously crafted file, since all versions of Ni Dasylab contain the out-of-bounds read vulnerability in file parsing.
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 dataUsers should avoid opening files from untrusted sources. The vendor should issue a patch addressing the file parsing vulnerability, and organizations should consider application whitelisting as an additional defense layer.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0955 — 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-2026-0955 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