CVE-2026-44056
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 stack-based buffer overflow in desktop.c in Netatalk 1.3 through 4.2.2 allows a remote authenticated attacker to cause a denial of service, obtain limited information, or modify limited data.
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 stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in desktop.c in Netatalk versions 1.3 through 4.2.2. The flaw allows an authenticated remote attacker to exploit the overflow, potentially causing denial of service, limited information disclosure, or limited data modification.
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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Confirm Netatalk is installedRun 'netatalk -V' or 'afpd -V' to check the installed version. On Linux, also check package manager: 'dpkg -l | grep netatalk' or 'rpm -qa | grep netatalk'.Affected if Netatalk is installed and the version falls between 1.3 and 4.2.2 inclusive
-
Verify AFP service is enabledCheck if the afpd daemon is running: 'ps aux | grep afpd' or check netatalk configuration files (typically /etc/netatalk/afpd.conf or /usr/local/etc/netatalk/afpd.conf) for enabled shares.Affected if AFP service is active and desktop.c functionality is in use
-
Check if remote authentication is permittedReview netatalk configuration for 'afpd.conf' or 'AppleVolumes.default' to see if authentication is enabled and if the service is bound to network interfaces. Run 'netstat -tlnp | grep 548' to confirm AFP port 548 is listening on external interfaces.Affected if AFP service accepts remote connections and allows authenticated user access
-
Inspect desktop.c related configurationSearch configuration files in /etc/netatalk/ for any desktop-related module settings. Check if 'desktop' or 'desktop' parameter appears in afpd.conf or related config files.Affected if Desktop module is loaded or referenced in active configuration
You are affected if Netatalk versions 1.3 through 4.2.2 are installed AND the AFP service is running with remote authentication enabled, as this allows the stack-based buffer overflow in desktop.c to be exploited.
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 dataUpgrade Netatalk to a version beyond 4.2.2 that contains the security patch. If immediate patching is not possible, restrict network access to the affected service and ensure strong authentication controls are in place.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-44056 — 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-2026-44056 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