Memory LeakWeakness · CWE-401

CVE-2026-35505

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-30
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click 8 weeks old

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
An unauthenticated remote attacker can repeatedly send crafted connection requests to leak memory. In single-process deployments the memory grows until the service is killed and the port stops responding until restart.

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

An unauthenticated remote attacker can repeatedly send crafted connection requests to trigger a memory leak in the service. In single-process deployments, the uncontrolled memory growth causes the service to crash and the port becomes unresponsive until manually restarted, resulting in denial of service.

MitigationApply the vendor patch to fix the memory leak in connection request handling. As a compensating control, implement rate limiting or connection throttling to reduce the attack surface until the patch can be deployed.

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
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

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. Identify the running service and its version
    Use system commands (e.g., ps, tasklist, netstat) to identify which service is listening on the affected port, then query its version (e.g., service --version, application -v, or check installed package metadata)
    Affected if The service version falls within an affected range or cannot be determined to be patched
  2. Determine deployment architecture
    Check if the service runs in single-process mode by reviewing configuration files, process list, or startup parameters (look for single-process flags, absence of worker processes, or single-instance configuration)
    Affected if The service is deployed in single-process mode, as the vulnerability specifically causes crash and unresponsiveness in this architecture
  3. Verify network exposure
    Review firewall rules, bind addresses, and network accessibility to determine if the service port is exposed to unauthenticated remote attackers (e.g., check if port is bound to 0.0.0.0 or externally accessible)
    Affected if The service port is accessible from untrusted networks without authentication, allowing unauthenticated attackers to send crafted connection requests
  4. Monitor for memory growth patterns
    Observe memory usage of the service process over time, particularly when receiving repeated connection requests, using tools like top, htop, Task Manager, or memory profiling tools
    Affected if Memory usage grows uncontrollably with repeated connection attempts and does not stabilize or release
  5. Check for unexpected service crashes
    Review system logs, event logs, and service restart history for unexplained crashes or instances where the service became unresponsive and required manual restart
    Affected if The service has crashed or become unresponsive without other explainable causes, especially after heavy connection activity
  6. Review connection handling configuration
    Examine service configuration files for connection limits, timeouts, rate limiting, or throttling settings that may mitigate the vulnerability
    Affected if No connection rate limiting or throttling is configured, leaving the service vulnerable to repeated crafted requests

The environment is affected if the service is exposed to unauthenticated remote access, runs in single-process mode, and exhibits memory leak behavior or crash history related to connection request handling.

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

Apply the vendor patch to fix the memory leak in connection request handling. As a compensating control, implement rate limiting or connection throttling to reduce the attack surface until the patch can be deployed.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-35505 — 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-2026-35505 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