dbcve.org
Out-of-bounds ReadWeakness · CWE-125

CVE-2026-48132

HIGH · 8.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-26
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
90/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable 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
The Security Gateway does not correctly validate a length value in certain IKE packets when NAT-T is used (4500/UDP). As a result, a specially crafted or malformed packet can cause the VPN processing service to terminate unexpectedly, leading to denial of service (temporary interruption of VPN negotiations/traffic).

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 Security Gateway has a validation flaw in processing IKE packets when NAT-Traversal is enabled. Specifically, the gateway does not properly validate a length field in certain IKE packets received on UDP port 4500. An attacker sending a specially crafted malformed packet can trigger a buffer validation error, causing the VPN processing service to crash and terminate unexpectedly.

MitigationApply the vendor-provided security patch for this vulnerability. As a temporary workaround, consider filtering or rate-limiting IKE/NAT-T traffic on port 4500 at an upstream perimeter device 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
High
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/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 checks

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

  1. Verify NAT-Traversal is enabled
    Check the Security Gateway configuration for IKE/IPSec NAT-Traversal settings. On most gateways, this is found under VPN > IKE or IPSec > NAT-T settings. Look for options like 'Enable NAT-T', 'NAT-Traversal', or 'UDP encapsulation'.
    Affected if NAT-Traversal is enabled and the device processes IKE packets on UDP port 4500
  2. Confirm UDP port 4500 is exposed
    Run a port scan or check firewall rules to verify UDP port 4500 is open and listening. Use commands like 'netstat -anu | grep 4500' or 'nmap -sU -p 4500 <gateway_ip>'.
    Affected if UDP port 4500 is open and accepting IKE/NAT-T packets from untrusted networks
  3. Identify the Security Gateway product and version
    Locate the gateway device model and firmware/software version through the admin console, CLI command (such as 'show version' or 'system info'), or product labeling. Record the exact version string.
    Affected if The product is a Security Gateway handling IKE/NAT-T and the installed version is older than the vendor patched release for this vulnerability
  4. Review VPN service crash logs
    Examine system logs, VPN daemon logs, or syslog for recent entries indicating VPN service failures, buffer exceptions, or process crashes related to IKE or NAT-T processing. Look for keywords like 'IKE', 'NAT-T', 'buffer', 'exception', 'crash', or 'segfault'.
    Affected if Recent logs show VPN service crashes or exceptions correlating with IKE/NAT-T packet processing on port 4500
  5. Check for inbound IKE traffic on port 4500
    Monitor network traffic or review firewall logs for incoming UDP packets on port 4500. Use packet capture (tcpdump -i <interface> udp port 4500) or review IDS/IPS alerts for malformed IKE packets.
    Affected if The gateway receives IKE/NAT-T packets from external sources on UDP port 4500

The environment is affected if the Security Gateway has NAT-Traversal enabled with UDP port 4500 exposed, and the installed version predates the vendor patch for this input validation flaw.

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-provided security patch for this vulnerability. As a temporary workaround, consider filtering or rate-limiting IKE/NAT-T traffic on port 4500 at an upstream perimeter device until the patch can be deployed.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-48132 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2026-48132 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