WolfsslApplication

CVE-2026-6679

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-25
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 5.9.1 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click Patch available 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
A heap buffer overflow could occur in the DTLS 1.3 ACK serialization path before the connecting peer is authenticated. The buffer overflow was due to an integer truncation when computing the length of the ACK record-number list, causing an undersized buffer to be allocated and then overrun. This affects builds using DTLS 1.3 and wolfSSL version 5.9.0 and earlier. A fix was added to the 5.9.1 release.

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
How this class of weakness works · CWE-190

An arithmetic operation produces a value too large for its type and wraps around to an unexpected — often tiny or negative — number. That miscalculated value then drives a memory allocation or a bounds check, opening the door to corruption. The fix is checked arithmetic and validating sizes before they're used.

General guidance for the integer overflow class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
WolfsslApplication
Affected:>= 5.4.0, < 5.9.1

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
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

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

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 5.9.1 or later
Fixed in 5.9.1
Vendor patch github.com →
Recommended fix High confidence

wolfSSL 5.9.1 or later

  1. 1. Identify systems and applications using wolfSSL with DTLS 1.3 enabled
  2. 2. Check current wolfSSL version by running 'wolfssl version' or checking library metadata
  3. 3. Download wolfSSL version 5.9.1 or later from the official GitHub releases (https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/releases)
  4. 4. Extract the tarball and navigate to the source directory
  5. 5. Configure the build with typical options (e.g., ./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-dtls13)
  6. 6. Compile and install the new version: make && make install
  7. 7. Rebuild any applications that statically link against wolfSSL
  8. 8. Restart any services or daemons that use wolfSSL

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

We can perform the upgrade in your staging environment and verify nothing breaks — typical engagement from $3,200. Get the upgrade done

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-6679 — 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-2026-6679 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