Memory Buffer Bounds ErrorWeakness · CWE-119

CVE-2026-12200

HIGH · 7.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
A security vulnerability has been detected in Ritlabs TinyWeb Server up to 1.94 on Win32. This impacts an unknown function in the library libeay32.dll.html of the component Header Handler. The manipulation of the argument Authorization leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

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 confidence

Stack-based buffer overflow in Ritlabs TinyWeb Server's Header Handler when processing the Authorization header argument. The vulnerability exists in libeay32.dll.html and allows remote attackers to potentially execute arbitrary code via overly long Authorization credentials.

MitigationImplement strict bounds checking on the Authorization header input in the Header Handler component. Consider upgrading to a patched version once available or implementing input validation/limiting at the web server level.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

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

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm Ritlabs TinyWeb Server is installed
    Check the system for TinyWeb Server by looking for the executable (tinyweb.exe) in common installation directories such as C:\Program Files\TinyWeb or C:\TinyWeb, or search for the process running on common HTTP ports (80, 8080)
    Affected if TinyWeb Server executable is found running or installed on the system
  2. Identify the installed version
    Right-click on tinyweb.exe, select Properties, and check the File Version field under the Details tab. Alternatively, check any version.txt or README file in the installation directory
    Affected if The version number is 1.94 or lower (the summary states versions up to v1.94 are affected)
  3. Verify the vulnerable component exists
    Check for the presence of libeay32.dll.html in the TinyWeb installation directory - this is the Header Handler component cited in the vulnerability
    Affected if libeay32.dll.html exists in the TinyWeb installation folder
  4. Determine network exposure
    Check if TinyWeb Server is bound to a network-accessible IP address or is listening on interfaces exposed to untrusted networks. Review the server configuration for allowed clients or IP restrictions
    Affected if The server is listening on a public or untrusted network interface and accepts incoming HTTP requests containing the Authorization header

You are affected if Ritlabs TinyWeb Server v1.94 or lower is installed, the libeay32.dll.html component is present, and the server is network-accessible to handle malicious Authorization headers.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict bounds checking on the Authorization header input in the Header Handler component. Consider upgrading to a patched version once available or implementing input validation/limiting at the web server level.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-12200 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-12200 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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