CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-45615NVD status: Deferred

mouse07410/asn1c is an ASN.1 compiler. In 1.4 and earlier, a memory safety vulnerability was…

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-45615 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in asn1c from Mouse07410, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.2 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected asn1c versions: <= 1.4. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.2% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of asn1c you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Mouse07410asn1c<= 1.4Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
NoneNo data is disclosed.
Integrity
LowLimited modification of data is possible.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H. Scored by CNA (github.com).

Official description

mouse07410/asn1c is an ASN.1 compiler. In 1.4 and earlier, a memory safety vulnerability was identified in the OER decoding skeleton files generated by asn1c (specifically INTEGER_oer.c). When parsing a maliciously crafted, zero-length OER payload for a variable-length, non-negative INTEGER type, the decoder fails to validate the required bytes before extracting the Most Significant Bit (MSB). This forces a precise 1-byte Heap Out-of-Bounds (OOB) Read. Because asn1c generated code is primarily deployed to parse untrusted network inputs (such as V2X network protocols, 5G telecom headers, or X.509 certificates), when the decoder processes untrusted network-originated input, a remote attacker can exploit this to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) or trigger incorrect integer interpretation in downstream applications (e.g., protocol state poisoning or logic bypass).

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
  • Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
  • Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

More Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities (CWE-20)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.