BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-19548High confidence

Binutils: binutils: multiple use-after-free in add_archive_element via lto plugin processing

Red Hat · Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10

5.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 60 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • EPSS is 0.15% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Apply the linked authoritative mitigation while planning the permanent fix.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 60 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

5 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 4 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcebinutilsAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcebinutilsAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcebinutilsAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcebinutilsAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivebinutilsUnder evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2026-19548 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitybinutils: binutils: Multiple Use-After-Free in add_archive_element via LTO plugin processing
56 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • gcc-toolset-15-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • gcc-toolset-15-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • gcc-toolset-15-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • gcc-toolset-16-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • mingw-binutils-generic as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • mingw32-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
Summary
Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my_archive == NULL, but the caller retains both the original abfd parameter and a shallow copy (orig_input.the_bfd) as dangling pointers. These dangling pointers are subsequently dereferenced at three distinct locations in add_archive_element: 1. Line ~1442: accessing abfd->my_archive via bfd_usrdata(abfd->my_archive) 2. Line ~1493: multiple accesses to abfd and abfd->my_archive in a conditional check and bfd_get_filename call 3. Line ~1525: dereferencing the shallow copy orig_input.the_bfd->my_archive in trace/verbose logging The vulnerability is triggered when LTO plugins are active (link_info.lto_plugin_active is true) and the input object has abfd->my_archive == NULL, which is a valid state for standalone object files. Red Hat builds binutils with --enable-plugins and --enable-lto, confirming the vulnerable code path is compiled in and reachable. An attacker who can supply a crafted object or archive file to a build process using LTO-enabled linking could exploit this flaw to cause a denial of service (linker crash via segmentation fault). Arbitrary code execution is theoretically possible through heap manipulation but is substantially mitigated by hardening measures including stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, ASLR, and PIE. The attack surface is limited to build-time environments — the linker is a development tool not exposed in production runtime. The most realistic exploitation scenario is a supply chain attack introducing a crafted object file as a build dependency in CI/CD pipelines or development environments.
Remediation
Build environments should avoid running LTO-enabled linking (ld with plugin support) against untrusted or externally-supplied object and archive files. The linker is a build-time tool, not present in production runtimes, so the realistic exposure is to CI/CD pipelines and developer workstations that build from untrusted or externally-contributed sources (supply-chain style attack). Standard hardening measures (ASLR, stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, PIE) substantially reduce the likelihood of arbitrary code execution via heap manipulation, limiting the more realistic impact to a linker crash (denial of service).
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-57318

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my_archive == NULL, but the caller retains both the original abfd parameter and a shallow copy (orig_input.the_bfd) as dangling pointers. These dangling pointers are subsequently dereferenced at three distinct locations in add_archive_element: 1. Line ~1442: accessing abfd->my_archive via bfd_usrdata(abfd->my_archive) 2. Line ~1493: multiple accesses to abfd and abfd->my_archive in a conditional check and bfd_get_filename call 3. Line ~1525: dereferencing the shallow copy orig_input.the_bfd->my_archive in trace/verbose logging The vulnerability is triggered when LTO plugins are active (link_info.lto_plugin_active is true) and the input object has abfd->my_archive == NULL, which is a valid state for standalone object files. Red Hat builds binutils with --enable-plugins and --enable-lto, confirming the vulnerable code path is compiled in and reachable. An attacker who can supply a crafted object or archive file to a build process using LTO-enabled linking could exploit this flaw to cause a denial of service (linker crash via segmentation fault). Arbitrary code execution is theoretically possible through heap manipulation but is substantially mitigated by hardening measures including stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, ASLR, and PIE. The attack surface is limited to build-time environments — the linker is a development tool not exposed in production runtime. The most realistic exploitation scenario is a supply chain attack introducing a crafted object file as a build dependency in CI/CD pipelines or development environments.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
5.5 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 60 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my_archive == NULL, but the caller retains both the original abfd parameter and a shallow copy (orig_input.the_bfd) as dangling pointers. These dangling pointers are subsequently dereferenced at three distinct locations in add_archive_element: 1. Line ~1442: accessing abfd->my_archive via bfd_usrdata(abfd->my_archive) 2. Line ~1493: multiple accesses to abfd and abfd->my_archive in a conditional check and bfd_get_filename call 3. Line ~1525: dereferencing the shallow copy orig_input.the_bfd->my_archive in trace/verbose logging The vulnerability is triggered when LTO plugins are active (link_info.lto_plugin_active is true) and the input object has abfd->my_archive == NULL, which is a valid state for standalone object files. Red Hat builds binutils with --enable-plugins and --enable-lto, confirming the vulnerable code path is compiled in and reachable. An attacker who can supply a crafted object or archive file to a build process using LTO-enabled linking could exploit this flaw to cause a denial of service (linker crash via segmentation fault). Arbitrary code execution is theoretically possible through heap manipulation but is substantially mitigated by hardening measures including stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, ASLR, and PIE. The attack surface is limited to build-time environments — the linker is a development tool not exposed in production runtime. The most realistic exploitation scenario is a supply chain attack introducing a crafted object file as a build dependency in CI/CD pipelines or development environments.

What

Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my_archive == NULL, but the caller retains both the original abfd parameter and a shallow copy (orig_input.the_bfd) as dangling pointers. These dangling pointers are subsequently dereferenced at three distinct locations in add_archive_element: 1. Line ~1442: accessing abfd->my_archive via bfd_usrdata(abfd->my_archive) 2. Line ~1493: multiple accesses to abfd and abfd->my_archive in a conditional check and bfd_get_filename call 3. Line ~1525: dereferencing the shallow copy orig_input.the_bfd->my_archive in trace/verbose logging The vulnerability is triggered when LTO plugins are active (link_info.lto_plugin_active is true) and the input object has abfd->my_archive == NULL, which is a valid state for standalone object files. Red Hat builds binutils with --enable-plugins and --enable-lto, confirming the vulnerable code path is compiled in and reachable. An attacker who can supply a crafted object or archive file to a build process using LTO-enabled linking could exploit this flaw to cause a denial of service (linker crash via segmentation fault). Arbitrary code execution is theoretically possible through heap manipulation but is substantially mitigated by hardening measures including stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, ASLR, and PIE. The attack surface is limited to build-time environments — the linker is a development tool not exposed in production runtime. The most realistic exploitation scenario is a supply chain attack introducing a crafted object file as a build dependency in CI/CD pipelines or development environments.

Why

The program can continue using memory after it has been released, producing unsafe and attacker-influenceable behaviour.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.

What

Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my_archive == NULL, but the caller retains both the original abfd parameter and a shallow copy (orig_input.the_bfd) as dangling pointers. These dangling pointers are subsequently dereferenced at three distinct locations in add_archive_element: 1. Line ~1442: accessing abfd->my_archive via bfd_usrdata(abfd->my_archive) 2. Line ~1493: multiple accesses to abfd and abfd->my_archive in a conditional check and bfd_get_filename call 3. Line ~1525: dereferencing the shallow copy orig_input.the_bfd->my_archive in trace/verbose logging The vulnerability is triggered when LTO plugins are active (link_info.lto_plugin_active is true) and the input object has abfd->my_archive == NULL, which is a valid state for standalone object files. Red Hat builds binutils with --enable-plugins and --enable-lto, confirming the vulnerable code path is compiled in and reachable. An attacker who can supply a crafted object or archive file to a build process using LTO-enabled linking could exploit this flaw to cause a denial of service (linker crash via segmentation fault). Arbitrary code execution is theoretically possible through heap manipulation but is substantially mitigated by hardening measures including stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, ASLR, and PIE. The attack surface is limited to build-time environments — the linker is a development tool not exposed in production runtime. The most realistic exploitation scenario is a supply chain attack introducing a crafted object file as a build dependency in CI/CD pipelines or development environments.

Why

The program can continue using memory after it has been released, producing unsafe and attacker-influenceable behaviour.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
local access → Use After Free → execute code or commands in the affected security context
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
Required interaction required
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-416 ↗

CWE-416: Use After Free. The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory belongs to the code that operates on the new pointer.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
UnauthenticatedRemote code executionDenial of serviceCWE-416
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-57318Official EUVD mapping

Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my_archive == NULL, but the caller retains both the original abfd parameter and a shallow copy (orig_input.the_bfd) as dangling pointers. These dangling pointers are subsequently dereferenced at three distinct locations in add_archive_element: 1. Line ~1442: accessing abfd->my_archive via bfd_usrdata(abfd->my_archive) 2. Line ~1493: multiple accesses to abfd and abfd->my_archive in a conditional check and bfd_get_filename call 3. Line ~1525: dereferencing the shallow copy orig_input.the_bfd->my_archive in trace/verbose logging The vulnerability is triggered when LTO plugins are active (link_info.lto_plugin_active is true) and the input object has abfd->my_archive == NULL, which is a valid state for standalone object files. Red Hat builds binutils with --enable-plugins and --enable-lto, confirming the vulnerable code path is compiled in and reachable. An attacker who can supply a crafted object or archive file to a build process using LTO-enabled linking could exploit this flaw to cause a denial of service (linker crash via segmentation fault). Arbitrary code execution is theoretically possible through heap manipulation but is substantially mitigated by hardening measures including stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, ASLR, and PIE. The attack surface is limited to build-time environments — the linker is a development tool not exposed in production runtime. The most realistic exploitation scenario is a supply chain attack introducing a crafted object file as a build dependency in CI/CD pipelines or development environments.

Official EUVD record ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260819Security Bulletin 19 Aug 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 19 Aug 2026, published on 19 August 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-030356レッドハットのRed Hat Enterprise Linux等の複数製品における解放済みメモリの使用に関する脆弱性

GNUリンカ（ld）のbinutilsの構成要素であるld/ldmain.cのadd_archive_element関数に複数のUse-After-Free脆弱性が発見されました。根本原因は、ld/plugin.cのplugin_maybe_claim()がentry-＞the_bfd-＞my_archiveがNULLの場合にbfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfdを介して元のBFDオブジェクトを解放する一方で、呼び出し元は元のabfdパラメータの浅いコピーであるorig_input.the_bfdをダングリングポインタとして保持し続ける点にあります。これらのダングリングポインタはその後、add_archive_elementの以下の3つの異なる箇所で逆参照されます。1. 約1442行目：bfd_usrdata(abfd-＞my_archive)を介したabfd-＞my_archiveへのアクセス、2. 約1493行目：条件チェックおよびbfd_get_filename呼び出しにおけるabfdとabfd-＞my_archiveへの複数アクセス、3. 約1525行目：トレース／詳細ログ出力における浅いコピーであるorig_input.the_bfd-＞my_archiveの逆参照です。この脆弱性はLTOプラグインが有効な場合（link_info.lto_plugin_activeがtrue）かつ入力オブジェクトのabfd-＞my_archiveがNULLの場合に発動します。これは単独のオブジェクトファイルにおいて妥当な状態です。Red Hatは--enable-pluginsおよび--enable-ltoオプションでbinutilsをビルドしており、この脆弱なコードパスがコンパイルされて到達可能であることを確認しています。LTO対応のリンク処理を使用するビルドプロセスに、細工されたオブジェクトファイルまたはアーカイブファイルを供給できる攻撃者は、この脆弱性を悪用してサービス拒否（セグメンテーションフォルトによるリンカのクラッシュ）を引き起こす可能性があります。ヒープ操作による任意コード実行も理論上は可能ですが、スタックプロテクタ、FORTIFY_SOURCE、ASLR、PIEなどのハードニング対策により大幅に緩和されています。攻撃対象はビルド時環境に限定されており、リンカは開発ツールであって本番実行環境には直接露出しません。最も現実的な悪用シナリオは、CI/CDパイプラインや開発環境においてビルド依存関係として細工されたオブジェクトファイルを供給するサプライチェーン攻撃です。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
Build environments should avoid running LTO-enabled linking (ld with plugin support) against untrusted or externally-supplied object and archive files. The linker is a build-time tool, not present in production runtimes, so the realistic exposure is to CI/CD pipelines and developer workstations that build from untrusted or externally-contributed sources (supply-chain style attack). Standard hardening measures (ASLR, stack protector, FORTIFY_SOURCE, PIE) substantially reduce the likelihood of arbitrary code execution via heap manipulation, limiting the more realistic impact to a linker crash (denial of service).
Official vendor articles1 stored document

Linked articles are downloaded and versioned as source evidence. A CVE mention or approved update relationship does not, by itself, verify a fix for every product branch.

  • CVE-2026-19548 - Red Hat Customer Portal →Original publisher ↗Searchable text snapshot · Captured 27 Sep 2026CVE-2026-19548 Description Multiple Use-After-Free vulnerabilities were found in the add_archive_element function in ld/ldmain.c of the GNU linker (ld), a component of binutils. The root cause is that plugin_maybe_claim() in ld/plugin.c frees the original BFD object via bfd_close/_bfd_delete_bfd when entry->the_bfd->my
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 12 Aug 2026 · Last source change 1 Sept 2026, 12:48 UTC · CWE-416 · Use After Free

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-57318
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-16-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; mingw-binutils-generic as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; mingw32-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; mingw64-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6; binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7; binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; and 25 more
    After
    binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-15-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; gcc-toolset-16-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; mingw-binutils-generic as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; mingw32-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; mingw64-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6; binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7; binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-14-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gold as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils-gprofng as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; gcc-toolset-15-binutils.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8; and 26 more
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
  2. Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: added vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/CVE-2026-19548.
    Before
    no authoritative guidance recorded
    After
    vendor advisory: access.redhat.com/CVE-2026-19548
    secalert@redhat.com ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-57318↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-19548 · cve.blacktree.nl