CVE-2026-74039
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 · uneditedWazuh 4.0.0 before 4.14.7 and 5.0.0-beta2 contain a denial of service vulnerability that allows authenticated attackers with allow_run_as enabled to exhaust CPU resources by submitting arbitrarily deeply nested JSON structures to the POST /security/user/authenticate/run_as endpoint. Attackers can repeatedly submit malformed auth_context bodies with unlimited nesting depth to cause the API framework to consume excessive CPU, denying service to all other API consumers.
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 analysisThe application allocates memory, connections, or handles in response to a request without enforcing any cap, so a modest amount of malicious traffic exhausts the resource and denies service to everyone else. The fix is enforcing quotas, limits, and timeouts on what any single request or client can consume.
General guidance for the resource allocation without limits class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 · scopedWazuh 4.14.7 or later (or Wazuh 5.0.0+ for the 5.x branch)
- 1. Identify the current Wazuh version by checking the API endpoint /manager/info or running `wazuh-control info`
- 2. If running Wazuh 4.x (4.0.0 to 4.14.6), plan to upgrade to version 4.14.7 or later
- 3. If running Wazuh 5.0.0-beta2, upgrade to Wazuh 5.0.0 or later stable release
- 4. Before upgrading, review the Wazuh release notes for the target version for any configuration or feature changes
- 5. Perform a backup of the Wazuh configuration files (/var/ossec/etc/) and the Wazuh directory
- 6. Execute the upgrade following Wazuh official upgrade documentation for your installation type (packages or sources)
- 7. After upgrade, verify the API responds correctly: curl -k -u <user>:<password> https://localhost:55000/manager/info
- 8. Confirm the version shows 4.14.7 or later (or 5.0.0+ for the 5.x branch)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
There is no version to upgrade to and no patch to apply. Every affected install stays exposed until the vendor ships a fix — or somebody else builds one.
Free. We build fixes in the order the community asks for them — and we’ll tell you the moment this one lands.
We develop and verify an original fix where the vendor hasn’t, from $4,000. Deployed to your staging first — never straight to production.
Scope it with usSee what else the community needs solved on the solutions-needed board.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-74039 — 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-2026-74039 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