OESA-2026-3290 (CVE-2026-10723)

Vulnerability from osv_openeuler – Published: 2026-08-07 02:44 – Updated: 2026-08-07 02:44 – Source website
VLAI
Summary
bind security update
Details

BIND (Berkeley Internet Name Domain) is an implementation of the DNS (Domain Name System) protocols. BIND includes a DNS server (named), which resolves host names to IP addresses; a resolver library (routines for applications to use when interfacing with DNS); and tools for verifying that the DNS server is operating properly.

Security Fix(es):

BIND may accept incorrect child-zone NSEC3 records as valid, which could allow an attacker to forge authenticated NXDOMAIN responses. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-10723)

If BIND encounters a particular invalid data structure in a DNS record, it will accept the invalid data, and may subsequently abort and exit.

BIND will first need to store a DNS record for a key (KEY, DNSKEY, etc.). That key must specify a PRIVATEDNS algorithm (253), and in the algorithm identifier, improperly give a length longer than the actual identifier data. The invalid identifier will be stored. If BIND later needs to render that record to text, it will use the invalid length during processing, leading to a consistency check failing. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-10822)

An attacker who knows (or guesses) that a resolver uses RPZ with wildcard CNAME policies can craft query names long enough to trigger a NAMETOOLONG error condition during RPZ processing. This is not handled correctly and may lead to defeating the RPZ rule. It also may lead to an unexpected exit of the BIND 9 software. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11331)

The issue is a resource exhaustion vulnerability associated with DNSSEC validation. BIND always validates all RRSIG records in an answer, even if they are not strictly needed. A query to an authoritative server/zone which returns many valid but superfluous RRSIG records causes the validator to waste disproportionate CPU time. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11605)

A DNSSEC validating resolver that is under a random subdomain attack against a DNSSEC-signed zone can suffer from runaway memory usage. The attacker needs to be able to send queries faster than the resolver can perform validation. The increased memory usage can be orders of magnitude beyond the limit configured in the max-cache-size parameter. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11622)

It is possible for an attacker's zone to respond to a query with an RRSIG that has a smaller number of labels than the zone in which the RRSIG is contained. This causes named to produce a wildcard name for a zone that is shorter than the attacker's zone, which can result in cache poisoning. For this attack to have any effect, the resolver under attack must have set synth-from-dnssec yes; (which is the default). This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11721)

The issue is unexpected program termination based on ordering and/or specific content in responses to queries for CNAME or DNAME, and A records. Specifically, if a client queries for a DNAME and A record below the DNAME to the resolver, and the authoritative server responds positively to the A query but delays the DNAME response and later responds negatively, named may quit unexpectedly. Or, if a client queries for a CNAME and A record for the same name to the resolver, and the authoritative server responds positively to the A query but delays the CNAME response and later responds with a self-referential CNAME, the same failure may occur. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-12617)

If a provably insecure domain is covered by both an NSEC and NSEC3 record at the parent, and there exist an RRSIG for only one of these types, then BIND may exit unexpectedly with an assertion while validating this proof. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-13204)

The BIND resolver accepts validly-signed NSEC records where the "Next Domain Name" field points outside the signer's zone. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-13321)

Severity
8.6 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N
References
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "ecosystem_specific": {
        "aarch64": [
          "bind-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-chroot-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-debuginfo-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-debugsource-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-devel-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-dnssec-utils-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-libs-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm",
          "bind-utils-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.aarch64.rpm"
        ],
        "noarch": [
          "bind-dnssec-doc-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.noarch.rpm",
          "bind-license-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.noarch.rpm"
        ],
        "src": [
          "bind-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.src.rpm"
        ],
        "x86_64": [
          "bind-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-chroot-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-debuginfo-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-debugsource-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-devel-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-dnssec-utils-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-libs-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm",
          "bind-utils-9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4.x86_64.rpm"
        ]
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP4",
        "name": "bind",
        "purl": "pkg:rpm/openEuler/bind\u0026distro=openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP4"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "9.20.21-4.oe2403sp4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "severity": "High"
  },
  "details": "BIND (Berkeley Internet Name Domain) is an implementation of the DNS (Domain Name System) protocols. BIND includes a DNS server (named), which resolves host names to IP addresses; a resolver library (routines for applications to use when interfacing with DNS); and tools for verifying that the DNS server is operating properly.\r\n\r\nSecurity Fix(es):\n\nBIND may accept incorrect child-zone NSEC3 records as valid, which could allow an attacker to forge authenticated NXDOMAIN responses.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-10723)\n\nIf BIND encounters a particular invalid data structure in a DNS record, it will accept the invalid data, and may subsequently abort and exit.\n\nBIND will first need to store a DNS record for a key (KEY, DNSKEY, etc.). That key must specify a PRIVATEDNS algorithm (253), and in the algorithm identifier, improperly give a length longer than the actual identifier data. The invalid identifier will be stored. If BIND later needs to render that record to text, it will use the invalid length during processing, leading to a consistency check failing.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-10822)\n\nAn attacker who knows (or guesses) that a resolver uses RPZ with wildcard CNAME policies can craft query names long enough to trigger a NAMETOOLONG error condition during RPZ processing. This is not handled correctly and may lead to defeating the RPZ rule. It also may lead to an unexpected exit of the BIND 9 software.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.16.8-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11331)\n\nThe issue is a resource exhaustion vulnerability associated with DNSSEC validation. BIND always validates all RRSIG records in an answer, even if they are not strictly needed. A query to an authoritative server/zone which returns many valid but superfluous RRSIG records causes the validator to waste disproportionate CPU time.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11605)\n\nA DNSSEC validating resolver that is under a random subdomain attack against a DNSSEC-signed zone can suffer from runaway memory usage. The attacker needs to be able to send queries faster than the resolver can perform validation. The increased memory usage can be orders of magnitude beyond the limit configured in the `max-cache-size` parameter.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11622)\n\nIt is possible for an attacker\u0026apos;s zone to respond to a query with an RRSIG that has a smaller number of labels than the zone in which the RRSIG is contained. This causes `named` to produce a wildcard name for a zone that is shorter than the attacker\u0026apos;s zone, which can result in cache poisoning. For this attack to have any effect, the resolver under attack must have set `synth-from-dnssec yes;` (which is the default).\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-11721)\n\nThe issue is unexpected program termination based on ordering and/or specific content in responses to queries for CNAME or DNAME, and A records. Specifically, if a client queries for a DNAME and A record below the DNAME to the resolver, and the authoritative server responds positively to the A query but delays the DNAME response and later responds negatively, `named` may quit unexpectedly. Or, if a client queries for a CNAME and A record for the same name to the resolver, and the authoritative server responds positively to the A query but delays the CNAME response and later responds with a self-referential CNAME, the same failure may occur.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-12617)\n\nIf a provably insecure domain is covered by both an NSEC and NSEC3 record at the parent, and there exist an RRSIG for only one of these types, then BIND may exit unexpectedly with an assertion while validating this proof.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-13204)\n\nThe BIND resolver accepts validly-signed NSEC records where the \u0026quot;Next Domain Name\u0026quot; field points outside the signer\u0026apos;s zone.\nThis issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.(CVE-2026-13321)",
  "id": "OESA-2026-3290",
  "modified": "2026-08-07T02:44:23Z",
  "published": "2026-08-07T02:44:23Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-3290"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-10723"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-10822"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11331"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11605"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11622"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11721"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12617"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-13204"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-13321"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.7.2",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "bind security update",
  "upstream": [
    "CVE-2026-10723",
    "CVE-2026-10822",
    "CVE-2026-11331",
    "CVE-2026-11605",
    "CVE-2026-11622",
    "CVE-2026-11721",
    "CVE-2026-12617",
    "CVE-2026-13204",
    "CVE-2026-13321"
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.