Skip to main content

CVE-2026-116787signalwire freeswitch integer overflow

Schedule itHigh7.5EPSS not scored yet

CVE-2026-116787 is a integer overflow in signalwire freeswitch, rated high (7.5 on CVSS 3.1).

Why this priority: High severity, with no exploitation signal yet.

Published · Updated · NVD status: Analyzed

What it is

A calculation wraps around, so a size or count ends up far smaller or larger than intended, often leading to memory corruption. A size taken from input makes the software try to allocate huge amounts of memory.

How it is reached

An attacker can exploit it over the network, without an account, and nobody has to click anything.

What an attacker gains

A successful attack can take it offline. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker crash the process, read memory, or in the worst case run code.

Is it being exploited?

There is no public report of exploitation yet. It can be exploited automatically, at scale.

What to do

  1. Upgrade signalwire freeswitch to 1.11.2 or later. The patch notes are linked below.
  2. Until it is patched, keep it off the internet or behind a VPN, allowlist or authenticating proxy.

Description from NVD

FreeSWITCH is a Software Defined Telecom Stack enabling the digital transformation from proprietary telecom switches to a software implementation that runs on any commodity hardware. Prior to 1.11.2, mod_event_socket used an unauthenticated Content-Length value directly as the allocation size for an Event Socket message body. Negative or extremely large values could overflow the terminator calculation or force an allocation failure through a helper that aborts the FreeSWITCH process. The header is parsed before the Event Socket password, so any host admitted by apply-inbound-acl can trigger termination with its first packet; the default loopback ACL limits ordinary installations to local clients. The outbound socket dialplan path is also affected when FreeSWITCH connects to a hostile application server, and process termination drops every active call until the service is restarted. This issue is fixed in version 1.11.2.

What this means for your architecture.

A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.

Components it touches

  • Native code: operating systems, browsers and firmware. The flaw sits wherever native code reads untrusted data.
  • Network appliances and media or file parsers. The flaw sits wherever native code reads untrusted data.
  • Public entry points and shared services that must stay up. The flaw sits between untrusted traffic and shared capacity.

Trust boundaries in play

  • Internet-facing entry points. No account is needed. Any instance reachable from outside your perimeter, through a load balancer, gateway, VPN or exposed admin port, is in scope.
  • Wherever native code reads untrusted data. An attacker who crosses it can crash the process, read memory, or in the worst case run code.
  • Between untrusted traffic and shared capacity. An attacker who crosses it can exhaust CPU, memory or connections until the service stops answering.

Questions to answer about your own systems

  • Where does signalwire freeswitch run in your systems, and at which version?
  • Which of those instances can be reached from the internet or partner networks?
  • What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?

Sources

  • CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
  • Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
  • Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
  • Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.