CVE-2026-14191
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 · uneditedAn out-of-bounds heap write exists in the RAR5 recovery-volume (.rev) parser in WinRAR and UnRAR (RecVolumes5::ReadHeader in recvol5.cpp). The RecItems vector is sized only when the first .rev file in a set is processed; subsequent .rev files supply an independent RecNum value that is validated against that file's own TotalCount field but never against the actual size of RecItems. A crafted set of two or more .rev files can therefore write an attacker-controlled 32-bit value (the header's RevCRC field) to RecItems[RecNum] at an attacker-controlled offset up to 65534 * sizeof(RecVolItem) bytes past the allocation, corrupting adjacent heap objects. Triggering requires the victim to run a recovery/test operation on an attacker-supplied .rev set (for example 'unrar t x.part1.rev', WinRAR 'Repair archive', or auto-recovery when extracting a volume set with a missing .rar part). This is the RAR5-path sibling of CVE-2023-40477 (which was fixed in the RAR3 path only in WinRAR 6.23). Fixed in WinRAR / RAR 7.23.
In the news
Third-party coverage- Weekly Recap: Proxy Botnets, Browser Ransomware, AI Agent ...
- Microsoft CVE Summary - Bleeping Computer
Surfaced from public web coverage — external links open in a new tab.
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 · high confidenceOut-of-bounds heap write vulnerability in RAR5 recovery-volume (.rev) parser where RecItems vector is sized only on first .rev file processing; subsequent .rev files validate RecNum against their own TotalCount but not against actual RecItems vector size, allowing attacker-controlled writes of RevCRC field at offsets up to 65534 * sizeof(RecVolItem) bytes past allocation.
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
- 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.
-
Identify installed RAR/WinRAR versionRun 'rar -ver' or check WinRAR version via Help > About in the GUI, or locate winrar.exe/rar.exe and check file properties for version infoAffected if Version number is below 7.23 (e.g., 7.00, 6.x, 5.x)
-
Confirm RAR5 archive format supportCheck if the installed RAR version supports RAR5 format by running 'rar -v' or testing with a RAR5 archive; RAR5 is indicated by version 5.0+ in the help outputAffected if RAR5 support is enabled (RAR5 format is default for archives created with WinRAR 5.0+)
-
Determine if recovery volume (.rev) processing is possibleVerify .rev file extension handling is associated with the RAR installation; check if .rev files can be opened or processed by the installed RAR versionAffected if The system can process .rev files (the vulnerability triggers when RAR processes recovery volume files)
If RAR/WinRAR version is below 7.23 and the system can process RAR5 recovery volume (.rev) files, the environment is vulnerable to out-of-bounds heap writes.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade WinRAR/RAR to version 7.23 or later to obtain the vendor patch; avoid processing untrusted .rev files until update is applied.
WinRAR / RAR 7.23 or later
- 1. Check current WinRAR or RAR version by running 'winrar -?' or 'rar -?' from command line
- 2. Navigate to the official RARLab download page at www.rarlab.com
- 3. Download the latest WinRAR 7.x version (7.23 or later) for your operating system
- 4. Uninstall the current WinRAR installation or overwrite with the new installer
- 5. Verify the installation was successful by running 'winrar -?' and confirming the version shows 7.23 or higher
- 6. After upgrading, test that .rar and .rev files can be opened normally to confirm functionality
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-14191 — 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-2026-14191 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