CVE Tools

CVE-2026-58106

Incomplete fix for CVE-2025-40843: safe_strcpy is called with PATH_MAX into fullPath+2, writing 2 bytes past the buffer on every CodeChecker log invocation

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 5th percentile. No fix published yet.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

What to do

No fixed build or workaround is published yet. Limit exposure and watch for a patch.

What it is

From the CVE record

CVE-2025-40843 https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-5xf2-f6ch-6p8r  was fixed by replacing unchecked strcpy() with a bounded safe_strcpy() helper. At ldlogger-tool-gcc.c:129 the destination passed to that helper is fullPath + 2, but the size passed down is the full PATH_MAX. safe_strcpy() is strncpy(), which NUL-pads the destination out to the whole n, so this site writes 4096 bytes into the 4094 that remain — a 2-byte stack overflow on every invocation, independent of the input path's length. This issue affects CodeChecker: through 6.28.2.

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS5th
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

0.2% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 5th percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

6 events over 4 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Record updated
  2. Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped, record updated, record updated

Affected products

Technical detail

Weaknesses

ATT&CK techniques

Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for CodeChecker, not every advisory.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store