MediumCVE-2026-19953

    URI: Improper Validation of Unsafe Equivalence in Input (CVE-2026-19953)

    Published Last modified Sources: BSI, SUSE, CVE.org, Msrc Update Guide

    What is affected, what to do

    URI versions before 5.36 for Perl encode non-NFC host names to non-standard punycode labels via missing normalization in nameprep. nameprep lowercases each host label but performs no Unicode normalization. IDNA requires a label to be normalized to Form C before it is encoded (RFC 5891), so a label that is not already in NFC is encoded to a different A-label than its normalized form.

    Update URI to version 5.36.

    Affected
    • URI lt *..5.36
    Fixed in
    • URI 5.36

    Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability

    Metrics

    6.5

    Priority

    XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.

    Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v3

    6.5

    CVSS v3

    Severity Medium on the scale from 0 to 10.

    Source: BSI, SUSE, CVE.org, Msrc Update Guide

    0.2 %

    EPSS score

    Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.

    Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 12.9

    Show all metrics
    Severity
    Medium
    Priority score

    The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?

    Read in glossary
    60.30
    Exploit maturity

    An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.

    Read in glossary
    no public PoC known
    XIEM Effective CVSS

    XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.

    Read in glossary
    6.5
    CVSS v3

    CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.

    Read in glossary
    6.5
    EPSS score

    The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.

    Read in glossary
    0.2 %
    Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
    EPSS percentile

    The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.

    Read in glossary
    12.9
    Elevated — this CVE ranks above at least 10% of all CVEs scored today.
    KEV status

    The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.

    Read in glossary
    —
    Published
    CWE

    CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.

    Read in glossary
    CWE-1289

    Classification under NIS2 and CRA

    Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.

    NIS2

    NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.

    Read in glossary
    Handle the vulnerability in regular vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2.
    CRA

    The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.

    Read in glossary
    From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
    ISO/IEC 27001

    ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.

    Read in glossary
    Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.

    Description

    URI versions before 5.36 for Perl encode non-NFC host names to non-standard punycode labels via missing normalization in nameprep. nameprep lowercases each host label but performs no Unicode normalization. IDNA requires a label to be normalized to Form C before it is encoded (RFC 5891), so a label that is not already in NFC is encoded to a different A-label than its normalized form. A label built from the precomposed Devanagari sequence U+0958 U+093E encodes to xn--72b5c without normalization but to xn--11b2fg after NFC normalization, and xn--72b5c does not round-trip back to the original label. Any caller that reads host() from a URI built from untrusted input and uses it for a security decision (an allow or deny list, an SSRF filter, deduplication, a cache key) sees the non-standard label, while a client that fetches the same URL resolves the NFC form, so the check and the fetch can disagree about the host.

    Source: BSI CSAF, BSI WID Portal, suse_csaf, NVD (NIST), Microsoft Security Update Guide, cvelistv5

    Affected products

    The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.

    Affected products
    VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
    —URI
    • < 5.36
    • 5.36
    Red HatEnterprise Linux
    • 10
    • 8
    • 9
    • —
    • —
    • —

    Weakness classes (CWE)

    • CWE-1289Improper Validation of Unsafe Equivalence in Input

      Base

      The product receives an input value that is used as a resource identifier or other type of reference, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input is equivalent to a potentially-unsafe value.

      Entry at MITRE CWE-1289

    References & sources

    Reanalysis & status changes

    Chronological NVD audit events for this CVE — reanalyses, CVSS updates, CPE diffs.

    1. CVE Modified134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

      • CVSS V3.1: after AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
      • SSVC: after {"id":"CVE-2026-19953","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"yes"},{"technical…

    2. CVE Modifiedaf854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108

      • Reference: after http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/08/31/14

    3. New CVE Received9b29abf9-4ab0-4765-b253-1875cd9b441e

      • Description: after URI versions before 5.36 for Perl encode non-NFC host names to non-standard punycode labels via missing normalization in nameprep. nameprep lowercases each host label but performs no Unicode normalization. IDNA requires a label to be normalized to Form C before it is encoded (RFC 5891), so a label that is not already in NFC is encoded to a different A-label than its normalized form. A label built from the precomposed Devanagari sequence U+0958 U+093E encodes to xn--72b5c without normalization but to xn--11b2fg after NFC normalization, and xn--72b5c does not round-trip back to the original label. Any caller that reads host() from a URI built from untrusted input and uses it for a security decision (an allow or deny list, an SSRF filter, deduplication, a cache key) sees the non-standard label, while a client that fetches the same URL resolves the NFC form, so the check and the fetch can disagree about the host.
      • CWE: after CWE-1289
      • Affected: after New affected value received. <a href="https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/blob/main/cves/2026/19xxx/CVE-2026-19953.json">CVE-2026-19953</a>
      • Reference: after https://github.com/libwww-perl/URI/commit/956619a9e94f86d8d2c529b4e06a3674c54a73e7.patch