CVE
BACnet Stack denial of service in Structured View subordinate-list
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Exploited
- Proof of concept public, per CISA
- Fix
- Fixed in 1.6.1
- Who is exposed
- Not reported
Do first: Upgrade to a fixed version: 1.6.1.
- Last modified
- Whether it needs action now or is a reference record, by fixed rules, with why. Last checked is when cve.now last re-read it.What do these mean? →
- Reference
- Last checked
- FIRST's estimate of the chance attackers exploit it in the next 30 days, updated daily.What do these mean? →
- 0.50% · 43rd percentile
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 44/100 · provisional
- How many real-world setups can hit the bug, from the vendor's advisory and CISA data. It does not know your setup.What do these mean? →
- Unclear
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
- Exploitation: poc
- Automatable: yes
- Technical impact: partial
Summary
BACnet Stack, a BACnet protocol library for embedded systems, has a denial-of-service flaw in its Structured View object that an attacker can trigger remotely, without logging in, by writing to the subordinate-list property. Successful exploitation can make the server unavailable.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
Original description
BACnet Stack is a BACnet open source protocol stack C library for embedded systems. Prior to version 1.6.1, there is a server-side denial-of-service issue affecting the Structured View object implementation. This issue has been patched in versions 1.6.1 and 1.7.0.
cve.now Index
- Exploitation15/40CISA rates a proof of concept as public
- Exposure20/25No login or user action needed, CISA rates it automatable · Unknown: Advisories don't say whether default setups are affected
- Reach?/20Unknown. No tracked technology or package matched
- Severity8.7/10CVSS 8.7
- No patch0/5No signal
What would change the score
- Would score about 74 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 69 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
- Would score about 49 if advisories confirm default setups are exposed
What to do
Upgrade to a fixed version: 1.6.1.
Check your systems with an agent
Paste this into a coding or ops agent. It checks your systems read-only and reports a table per asset.
Check whether my systems are affected by CVE-2026-104204 (BACnet Stack: Structured View subordinate-list[0] WriteProperty allows unbounded synchronous resize and remote unauthenticated DoS), using the cve.now data below.
Rules: work read-only. Do not run exploit code, proof-of-concept scripts or scanners that send attack payloads, and do not change any configuration, package, image or deployment. Report findings only.
What cve.now has for CVE-2026-104204 (entry last updated 2026-11-13):
Affected:
- bacnet-stack bacnet-stack: fixed in 1.6.1
Fixed versions: 1.6.1.
Setup: unknown whether the bug needs a non-default feature or setting. Check the advisory.
Attacker needs: network access, no login, no user action.
CISA KEV: CVE-2026-104204 is not listed as of cve.now's last read.
This KEV status is for CVE-2026-104204 only. If you also check another CVE, look up its own KEV status; never assume it from this one.
How to check:
- Installed software: check what is actually running, not what a repo declares. Read the version from each host, container image and Kubernetes node (the binary's version output, the OS package database, image layers), and check whether the conditions above hold there. Distribution packages may carry a backported fix under an older version number; confirm against the distribution's own advisory.
Verify against the linked advisories before concluding, and cite the date you read each one:
- https://github.com/bacnet-stack/bacnet-stack/security/advisories/GHSA-hg85-pmm3-jfcf
- https://github.com/bacnet-stack/bacnet-stack/pull/1437
Do not conclude an asset is unaffected unless you checked it and the evidence covers both its version and the conditions above. If you could not check something, mark it unknown and say what is missing.
Report a table with one row per asset and these columns: Asset | Version or build | Status (affected, fixed, not applicable, unknown) | Compensating controls | Exposure (internet-facing, internal, none) | Evidence | Next action.
Entry: https://cve.now/CVE-2026-104204
For follow-up questions, use the cve.now MCP server at https://mcp.cve.now/mcp (no authentication), for example execute with name cve.get and arguments {"id": "CVE-2026-104204"}.Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
- CISA SSVC assessment
Exploitation: poc · Automatable: yes · Technical impact: partial
- Record last updated
Affected versions
- bacnet-stack bacnet-stack
fixed in 1.6.1
Evidence 4
Vendor advisory · 1
Establishes: Affected and fixed versions.
- Advisory
CVE record · 2
Establishes: The identifier and description.
- Record
- Record
Other links · 1
- Repository
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-104204
Is CVE-2026-104204 being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. CISA's SSVC assessment notes a proof of concept exists. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data
Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-104204?
bacnet-stack: before 1.6.1.Source: cve.now feed data
How do I fix CVE-2026-104204?
Upgrade to a fixed version: 1.6.1.Source: cve.now feed data