Out-of-bounds ReadWeakness · CWE-125

CVE-2026-37535

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-01
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
76/100
Remediation priority · High
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
openxc/isotp-c thru commit 5a5d19245f65189202719321facd49ce6f5d46ac (2021-08-09) contains an out-of-bounds read in the ISO-TP Single Frame receive handler, where the 4-bit payload length nibble is used directly as the memcpy size without validating it against the actual CAN data length. A malicious CAN frame with an oversized length nibble can cause memory reads beyond the buffer, allowing attackers to cause a denial of service, or gain sensitive information.

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 confidence

The ISO-TP Single Frame receive handler in openxc/isotp-c uses a 4-bit payload length nibble directly as the memcpy size without validating it against the actual CAN data frame length. An attacker can craft a malicious CAN frame with an oversized length nibble to read beyond buffer boundaries, causing denial of service or leaking sensitive memory contents.

MitigationImplement bounds validation: verify the extracted length nibble does not exceed the actual CAN data length before using it in memcpy operations. Add explicit length checks in the Single Frame receive handler.

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
Adjacent
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
High

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

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

  1. Identify if openxc or isotp-c library is in use
    Search your codebase, dependencies, or compiled binaries for the openxc or isotp-c library files. Check build files, package manifests, or linker outputs for references to these libraries.
    Affected if The openxc or isotp-c library is present in your environment
  2. Determine the installed version of the library
    Check the version string in the library headers, source files, or library filename. For compiled binaries, use 'strings' or inspect metadata. Compare against any known version releases.
    Affected if The library version cannot be determined or is an early release prior to any security fixes
  3. Verify ISO-TP Single Frame reception is enabled
    Inspect your application configuration or code to confirm ISO-TP protocol handling is active. Check for initialization of ISO-TP receive handlers and usage of isotp_recv or similar API functions.
    Affected if ISO-TP receive functionality is actively used in your application
  4. Inspect the Single Frame handler for bounds validation
    If you have access to source code, locate the Single Frame receive handler function and verify whether length validation occurs before memcpy operations using the payload length nibble. Look for explicit checks comparing extracted length against actual CAN frame data length.
    Affected if No bounds validation is performed on the 4-bit length nibble before it is used as memcpy size in the Single Frame handler

You are affected if you use the openxc or isotp-c library with ISO-TP receive functionality and the Single Frame handler lacks explicit validation of the payload length nibble against the actual CAN data frame length before memcpy operations.

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 bounds validation: verify the extracted length nibble does not exceed the actual CAN data length before using it in memcpy operations. Add explicit length checks in the Single Frame receive handler.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation5.0 h
  • Testing5.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,610
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-37535 — 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-2026-37535 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