Overview 6 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
6matches
0in Waratek scope0.0%
0protected0.0%
0exploited0.0%
0CISA KEV0.0%
0public PoC0.0%
0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
Outside Waratek scope
0
0.0%
Not applicable
6
100.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
6
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
0
0.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
6
100.0%
split by
peak 6 / month
Jul 26
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-13321 | High | 2026-07-22 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The BIND resolver accepts validly-signed NSEC records where the "Next Domain Name" field points outside the signer's zone. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |
| CVE-2026-13204 | High | 2026-07-22 | Not applicable | No public exploit | If a provably insecure domain is covered by both an NSEC and NSEC3 record at the parent, and there exist an RRSIG for only one of these types, then BIND may exit unexpectedly with an assertion while validating this proof. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |
| CVE-2026-11721 | High | 2026-07-22 | Not applicable | No public exploit | It is possible for an attacker's zone to respond to a query with an RRSIG that has a smaller number of labels than the zone in which the RRSIG is contained. This causes `named` to produce a wildcard name for a zone that is shorter than the attacker's zone, which can result in cache poisoning. For this attack to have any effect, the resolver under attack must have set `synth-from-dnssec yes;` (which is the default). This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |
| CVE-2026-11622 | High | 2026-07-22 | Not applicable | No public exploit | A DNSSEC validating resolver that is under a random subdomain attack against a DNSSEC-signed zone can suffer from runaway memory usage. The attacker needs to be able to send queries faster than the resolver can perform validation. The increased memory usage can be orders of magnitude beyond the limit configured in the `max-cache-size` parameter. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |
| CVE-2026-11331 | High | 2026-07-22 | Not applicable | No public exploit | An attacker who knows (or guesses) that a resolver uses RPZ with wildcard CNAME policies can craft query names long enough to trigger a NAMETOOLONG error condition during RPZ processing. This is not handled correctly and may lead to defeating the RPZ rule. It also may lead to an unexpected exit of the BIND 9 software. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |
| CVE-2026-10723 | Medium | 2026-07-22 | Not applicable | No public exploit | BIND may accept incorrect child-zone NSEC3 records as valid, which could allow an attacker to forge authenticated NXDOMAIN responses. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |