CVE-2026-50144
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 · uneditedncnn is a high-performance neural network inference framework optimized for the mobile platform. In commit e54f7b1f88434e1d844ea0551b880a1cfb079ce1 and earlier, ncnn allows an out-of-bounds heap write in ncnn::ParamDict::load_param() when Net::load_param() loads a malicious .param model file because the parsed parameter id is checked only against id >= NCNN_MAX_PARAM_COUNT, allowing a negative id to index before the params[NCNN_MAX_PARAM_COUNT] array. This vulnerability is fixed by commit 5a0288f255daa6c3294f77109f67718e434ec020.
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 confidencencnn allows an out-of-bounds heap write in ncnn::ParamDict::load_param() when loading malicious .param model files. The vulnerability occurs because parameter IDs are only validated against the upper bound (id >= NCNN_MAX_PARAM_COUNT), allowing negative IDs to index before the params array.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate ncnn library in the environmentSearch for ncnn shared libraries (libncnn.so on Linux, ncnn.dll on Windows, libncnn.dylib on macOS) or check build artifacts for ncnn dependency.Affected if ncnn library is found and used in the environment.
-
Determine ncnn library versionFor installed libraries, run 'ldd <executable>' or check library file metadata. For source builds, inspect version headers or git commit information. Compare against any known version indicators.Affected if The installed version predates the fix commit 5a0288f255daa6c3294f77109f67718e434ec020 or version information is unavailable/unclear.
-
Identify .param file loading usageSearch codebase for calls to load_param(), from_param(), or ParamDict::load_param() function usage. Check for model loading code paths that accept .param files.Affected if The application loads .param model files.
-
Check source for vulnerable code patternInspect ncnn source file 'paramdict.cpp' or equivalent. Look for load_param function and verify if parameter ID validation includes both lower bounds (id >= 0) and upper bounds (id < NCNN_MAX_PARAM_COUNT).Affected if The validation only checks upper bound (id >= NCNN_MAX_PARAM_COUNT) without checking if id is non-negative.
If ncnn is present, loads .param files, and the code lacks lower bounds validation for parameter IDs, the environment is vulnerable to out-of-bounds heap write via malicious .param files.
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 dataUpdate ncnn to a version after commit 5a0288f255daa6c3294f77109f67718e434ec020 which adds proper lower bounds checking. Additionally, validate or restrict .param files from untrusted sources.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-50144 — 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-2026-50144 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