CVE-2026-12216
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 · uneditedA weakness has been identified in svaarala duktape up to 2.99.99. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file duk_api_bytecode.c. Executing a manipulation of the argument count_instr can lead to memory corruption. The attack requires local access. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. 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 confidenceA memory corruption vulnerability exists in Duktape JavaScript engine up to version 2.99.99 in the file duk_api_bytecode.c. The vulnerability is triggered by manipulating the count_instr argument during bytecode processing, leading to memory corruption. The attack requires local access to the system.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Detect if Duktape is installedSearch for Duktape library files (libduktape.*, duktape.h) or check package managers (dpkg -l | grep duktape, npm list duktape, pip show duktape)Affected if Duktape library or header files are found on the system
-
Identify the Duktape versionCheck the version string in the library binary, header file (look for DUK_VERSION or DUK_VERSION_STRING in duktape.h), or via package manager queryAffected if The installed version is 2.99.99 or any version up to 2.99.99 (the last vulnerable version)
-
Verify bytecode processing is in useReview application code or configuration for calls to duk_peval, duk_eval, duk_compile, or other bytecode execution functions from the duk_api_bytecode.c moduleAffected if The application loads, evaluates, or processes JavaScript bytecode using Duktape's bytecode API functions
-
Check for local access requirementsAssess whether untrusted local users have access to the system or can supply bytecode input to a Duktape-powered applicationAffected if Local users can supply bytecode input to a Duktape instance without validation
You are affected if Duktape version 2.99.99 or any earlier version (up to 2.99.99) is installed AND your application processes bytecode using Duktape's bytecode API, with exploitable local access.
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 dataSince the vendor did not respond, prioritize implementing strict access controls to limit local access to the affected system and monitor for the publicly available exploit. Consider upgrading to any newer version once released or patching the count_instr argument validation in duk_api_bytecode.c.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-12216 — 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-2026-12216 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