HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Gemini CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 72854 msgpack c integer overflow in
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 5.8CVE-2026-72854

msgpack-c Integer Overflow in msgpack_unpacker_expand_buffer Causes a False-Success Undersized ReservationCVE-2026-72854

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-72854 records a Medium severity (CVSS 5.8) vulnerability in msgpack-c Integer Overflow in msgpack_unpacker_expand_buffer Causes a False-Success Undersized Reservation. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps msgpack/msgpack-c (generic), msgpack/msgpack-c (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Aug 20, 2026Updated Sep 24, 2026Source checked Oct 5, 2026First seen by HOL Aug 20, 2026Material review Sep 24, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Record context

Vulnerability class
Memory Corruption
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-190, CWE-787
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 5, 2026
References
6 linked sources
Open source record

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 5.8
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Not reported

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 5.8. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps msgpack/msgpack-c (generic), msgpack/msgpack-c (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
msgpack/msgpack-cgeneric0Not reported
msgpack/msgpack-cgeneric>=0 <=7.0.1Not reported

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for msgpack/msgpack-c, msgpack/msgpack-c.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Monitor this advisory for an available fix and review any installs of the affected package.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Aug 20, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Sep 24, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Aug 20, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • Source referencevulncheck.com
Upstream source description

msgpack_unpacker_expand_buffer in src/unpack.c, reached through the public msgpack_unpacker_reserve_buffer API, computes its new buffer size using an unchecked size_t addition of the requested size and the amount already used. The doubling loop guards its own multiplication against overflow, but the addition in the loop condition is unguarded, so a request near SIZE_MAX wraps: the loop condition is already satisfied, the allocation is performed at the small pre-wrap size, and the function returns true. The caller is told the requested capacity was reserved when it was not, so a subsequent write of the requested length overflows the heap buffer. The library's own example/lib_buffer_unpack.c demonstrates the reserve-then-write pattern, and its defensive assert comparing capacity against the request is compiled out under NDEBUG. msgpack-c's own decode entry points do not derive the reservation size from untrusted input, so reaching this requires an integration that passes an attacker-influenced length to the reservation API, such as a length-prefixed streaming transport.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • WordPress Mindio Magic MCP plugin <= 0.5.6 - Sensitive Data Exposure vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem
  • WWBN AVideo 12.4 through 29.2.0 Stored XSS via Double-Encoded Video TitleSame generic ecosystem
  • WWBN AVideo through 29.2.0 Stored XSS via trailer1 in YouPHPFlix2 TemplatesSame generic ecosystem
  • RainyGao DocSys Database Management BaseController.java BaseController.createDBForMysql sql injectionSame generic ecosystem
  • invariant-systems-ai aiir Policy Gate signature verificationSame generic ecosystem
  • crossplane crossplane-runtime ImageConfig client.go Get toctouSame generic ecosystem