CVE-2026-44390

Unbounded name compression in certain cases causes degradation of service

MEDIUM
5.3
CVSS Score
Published: May 20, 2026 at 09:21 AM UTC
Updated: September 1, 2026 at 01:19 PM UTC
3 products affected across 2 vendorsUnboundEnterprise LinuxOpenShift Container Platform

Using Unbound by NLnet Labs?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Unbound - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM5.3
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.6%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

NLnet Labs Unbound up to and including version 1.25.0 has a vulnerability when handling replies with very large RRsets that Unbound needs to perform name compression for. Malicious upstream responses with very large RRsets with records that don't share a suffix above the root can cause Unbound to spend a considerable time applying name compression to downstream replies. This can lead to degraded performance and eventually denial of service in well orchestrated attacks. An adversary can exploit the vulnerability by querying Unbound for the specially crafted contents of a malicious zone with very large RRsets. Before Unbound replies to the query it will try to apply name compression which was an unbounded operation that could lock the CPU until the whole packet was complete. A compression limit was introduced in 1.21.1 for this but it didn't account for the case where records would not share any suffix above the root. That causes Unbound to go in a different code path because of the compression tree lookup failure and eventually not increment the compression counter for those operations. Unbound 1.25.1 contains a patch with a fix that increments the compression counter regardless of the compression tree lookup. This is a complement fix to CVE-2024-8508.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

v < 1.25.1
Affected range stops below 1.25.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Vendor states this is fixed in 0:1.16.2-5.12.el8_10 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 0:1.24.2-3.el9_8.2 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 0:1.24.2-7.el10_2.2 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

References (8)

Vendor AdvisoryMitigation
Source: cverecord
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/downloads/unbound/CVE-2026-44390.txt
Source: 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c
https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-44390
Source: 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2480130
Source: 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:24013
Source: 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:36320
Source: 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:36777
Source: 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:37282

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitAutomatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
NONE
Availability
LOW
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
CWE-407CWE-1050

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card