CVE-2026-35424
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 · uneditedMissing release of memory after effective lifetime in Windows Internet Key Exchange (IKE) Protocol allows an unauthorized attacker to deny service over a network.
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 confidenceA memory leak vulnerability exists in Windows Internet Key Exchange (IKE) Protocol where memory is not properly released after its effective lifetime. A remote, unauthenticated attacker can exploit this by sending specially crafted IKE packets over the network to cause the system to exhaust memory and become unresponsive, resulting in denial of service.
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 data< 10.0.14393.9140< 10.0.17763.8755< 10.0.19044.7291< 10.0.19045.7291< 10.0.22631.7079< 10.0.26100.8390< 10.0.26200.8390< 10.0.28000.2113CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Check Windows version against affected rangesRun 'winver' or 'systeminfo | findstr /B /C:"OS Name" /C:"OS Version"' and compare the build number to the vulnerable versions listed (e.g., 14393.9140, 17763.8755, 19044.7291, etc.)Affected if The installed Windows build number is lower than the fixed version for that release branch
-
Verify IKE protocol service is runningOpen Services console (services.msc) and check if 'IPsec Policy Agent' or 'IKE and AuthIP Keying Modules' service status, or run 'get-service -Name IKEEXT' in PowerShellAffected if The IKE service is running and enabled on the system
-
Check for IKE network listenersRun 'netstat -ano | findstr ":500"' and 'netstat -ano | findstr ":4500"' to see if IKE ports (500/UDP, 4500/UDP) are listeningAffected if The system is listening on UDP ports 500 or 4500, indicating IKE is exposed on the network
-
Monitor for memory exhaustionRun 'taskmgr' or 'Get-Process | Sort-Object WorkingSet64 -Descending | Select-Object -First 10' to check for processes consuming unusually high memory, or check Event Viewer for Event ID 20227 (IKE/AuthIP diagnostics)Affected if System memory is rapidly depleting or multiple IKE service processes are consuming excessive memory
-
Review firewall rules for IKE exposureRun 'netsh advfirewall firewall show rule name=all' or check Windows Firewall settings for rules allowing UDP 500/4500 from untrusted networksAffected if Firewall rules permit IKE traffic from external/untrusted networks without restriction
A system is likely affected if it runs a vulnerable Windows version with IKE protocol enabled and exposed to the network, showing signs of memory exhaustion.
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 · scoped10.0.14393.914010.0.17763.875510.0.19044.7291
Apply Microsoft security patches for this vulnerability as soon as they become available. As an interim measure, consider restricting IKE protocol exposure through firewall rules or disabling IKE if not required, while monitoring for signs of memory exhaustion.
Windows 10 1607: 10.0.14393.9140 | Windows 10 1809: 10.0.17763.8755 | Windows 10 21h2: 10.0.19044.7291 | Windows 10 22h2: 10.0.19045.7291 | Windows 11 23h2: 10.0.22631.7079 | Windows 11 24h2: 10.0.26100.8390 | Windows 11 25h2: 10.0.26200.8390 | Windows 11 26h1: 10.0.28000.2113
- Open Settings > Windows Update and check for updates
- Install all available security updates for your Windows version
- Restart the system if prompted
- Verify the patch was installed by checking the OS build number matches or exceeds the fixed version for your build
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-35424 — 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-2026-35424 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