CVE-2026-44639Low· 3.7▾ TwilightPoC availableNanoMQ is an MQTT broker. Prior to 0.24.14, NanoMQ's MQTT v5 property decoder in nng/src/supplemental/mqtt/mqtt_codec.c uses property_append() to walk the entire linked list for each property added by decode_buf_properties(). A remote un…
▾ Twilight zone — High severity, or a signal on a lesser flaw
impact 20.4 · likelihood 0.1 · exploitation 12
A public proof-of-concept already exists for this vulnerability — see Exploit availability below.
Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization from CISA's ADP record at CVE.org: whether exploitation is observed, whether an attack can be automated, and how much of the system is at stake.
Exploit-prediction probability, daily snapshots since Sep 19.
Disclosure to exploitation, from the record and what we observed since indexing it.
Disclosed via NVD
Exploit / PoC code exists
0.3%
0.3% → 0.4%
NanoMQ is an MQTT broker. Prior to 0.24.14, NanoMQ's MQTT v5 property decoder in nng/src/supplemental/mqtt/mqtt_codec.c uses property_append() to walk the entire linked list for each property added by decode_buf_properties(). A remote unauthenticated client can supply a PUBLISH or SUBSCRIBE packet containing many User Properties, causing O(N²) linked-list insertion and CPU work that makes the broker unresponsive; repeated packets can sustain the denial of service. This issue is fixed in version 0.24.14.
Refer to the linked advisories for vendor-supplied fixes and affected version ranges.
Field changes observed since this record was first indexed.
Connected by shared product, vendor, weakness, or advisory.
CVE-2026-61633Low· 2.0NanoMQ is an MQTT broker
CVE-2026-73863High· 7.0NanoMQ is an MQTT broker
CVE-2025-59947Critical· 9.0NanoMQ is a messaging broker/bus for IoT Edge & SDV
CVE-2025-59946High· 7.5NanoMQ MQTT Broker (NanoMQ) is an Edge Messaging Platform
CVE-2026-96640High· 8.2Pillow PDF append accepts malformed shared page-tree DAG causing resource exhaustion
CVE-2026-114138High· 7.5Django REST framework: Accept header with many large quoted parameters burns ~19s of CPU per request in content negotiation