There's a flaw in lz4. An attacker who submits a crafted file to an application linked with lz4 may be able to trigger an integer overflow, leading to calling of memmove() on a negative size argument, causing an out-of-bounds write and/or a crash. The greatest impact of this flaw is to availability, with some potential impact to confidentiality and integrity as well.
CVE-2021-3520
“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.
Score 9.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2022-05-24. NVD baseline CVSS 9.8; sources differ by 0.0.
Also known asEUVD-2021-26836 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD
- High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
A fix is available — apply it.
- CVSS v3
- 9.8
- EG Score
- 9.8CRITICALmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 60EG Risk 60/100
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.
How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity98% × 45%Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.Exploitation3.4% × 40%FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.Automatability100% × 15%CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high. - EPSS PROB
- 3.4%
- EPSS %ILE
- 88th
- KEV
- Not listed
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 3.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
Published
June 2, 2021
Last Modified
October 14, 2026
Advisory Details (2)
Auto-updated Oct 30, 20261954559 – (CVE-2021-3520) CVE-2021-3520 lz4: memory corruption due to an integer overflow bug caused by memmove argument
Affected: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7. To learn more about Red Hat Enterprise Linux support life cycles, please see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954559Vendor Advisories for CVE-2021-3520(5)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
- CVE-2021-3520Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC)Critical
There's a flaw in lz4. An attacker who submits a crafted file to an application linked with lz4 may be able to trigger an integer overflow, leading to calling of memmove() on a negative size argument, causing an out-of-bounds write and/or a crash. The greatest impact of this flaw is to availability, with some potential impact to confidentiality and integrity as well.
- RHSA-2024:3527Red Hat Product SecurityMedium
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat AMQ Streams 2.7.0 release and security update
- RHSA-2022:6407Red Hat Product SecurityMedium
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Integration Camel-K 1.8 security update
- GHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966mGitHub Security AdvisoriesCritical
There's a flaw in lz4. An attacker who submits a crafted file to an application linked with lz4...
- RHBA-2021:2854Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Bug Fix Advisory: Migration Toolkit for Containers (MTC) 1.4.6 release advisory
Patch Availability(7)
| Vendor / Ecosystem | Fix (by version range) / Patch | Released | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| ubuntu | liblz4-1 (1.9.2-2ubuntu0.20.10.1) @ groovy | 2026-11-02 | ubuntu |
| ubuntu | liblz4-tool (0.0~r131-2ubuntu2+esm1) @ xenial | 2026-11-02 | ubuntu |
| redhat | patch | 2024-05-30 | redhat |
| redhat | lz4 | 2022-09-09 | redhat |
| redhat | patch | 2022-07-19 | redhat |
| redhat | rhmtc/openshift-velero-plugin-rhel8:v1.4.6-4 | 2021-07-21 | redhat |
| redhat | lz4-0:1.8.3-3.el8_4 | 2021-06-29 | redhat |
Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.
Affected Packages
(19 across 19 ecosystems)
Alpine:v3.12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.14(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.15(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.16(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.17(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.18(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.19(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.20(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.21(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.22(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.23(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Alpine:v3.24(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Debian:10(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | 1.8.3-1 |
| — |
Debian:11(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Debian:12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Debian:13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Debian:14(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | — |
| — |
Debian:9(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| lz4 | 0.0~r131-2 |
| — |
Weakness Classification(2)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Additional Vendor Advisories
(5)
Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 27× in last 7d / 98× in last 30d)
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.
Showing the most recent 100 of 279 refreshes on record for this CVE.
A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 179 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.
- 2026-11-02 11:53 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-02 11:53 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-11-02 11:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-11-01 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-11-01 11:06 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-01 11:06 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-11-01 11:06 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-31 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-31 10:21 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-31 10:21 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-31 10:21 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-30 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-30 09:31 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-30 09:31 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-30 09:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-29 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-29 08:46 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-29 08:46 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-29 08:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-28 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-28 07:57 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-28 07:57 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-28 07:56 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-27 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-27 07:10 UTCEG score recompute
Show 75 moreShow fewer
- 2026-10-27 07:10 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-27 07:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-26 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-26 03:19 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-26 03:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-25 18:26 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-25 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-25 02:30 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-25 02:30 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-25 02:30 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-24 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-24 01:45 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-24 01:45 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-24 01:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-23 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-23 00:58 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-23 00:58 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-23 00:58 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-22 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-22 00:12 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-22 00:12 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-22 00:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-21 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-20 23:26 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-20 23:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-20 23:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-20 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-19 22:39 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-19 22:39 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-19 22:39 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-19 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-18 21:23 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-18 21:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-18 21:23 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-18 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-18 08:59 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-17 19:55 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-17 19:55 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-17 19:55 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-17 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-16 19:07 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-16 19:07 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-16 19:07 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-16 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-15 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-15 16:20 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-15 16:20 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-15 16:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-14 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.4% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-14 10:26 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-14 10:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-14 10:00 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-14 10:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-13 23:08 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-13 23:08 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-13 23:07 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-13 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-12 19:15 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-12 19:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-12 19:14 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-12 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-11 23:39 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-10 19:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-09 20:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-08 21:24 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-08 21:24 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-08 21:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-gmc7-pqv9-966m · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
- 2026-10-08 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-07 23:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-06 15:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-05 17:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-04 23:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-03 14:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-02 16:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
Related CVEs(same product + same vendor + same CWE)
Same product
3 shownAlpine:v3.12:lz4 · Debian:11:lz4
Same vendor
10 shownredhat:RHSA-2022:5606 · redhat:RHBA-2021:2854 · redhat:RHSA-2024:3527
- CVE-2020-9492EG 8.8EPSS p91HIGH
- CVE-2020-27223NVD 5.2EG 8.5EPSS p100HIGH
- CVE-2021-37714EG 7.5EPSS p94HIGH
- CVE-2021-38153EG 5.9EPSS p94MEDIUM
- CVE-2021-22137EG 5.3MEDIUM
- CVE-2021-22132EG 4.8MEDIUM
- CVE-2022-42920EG 9.8CRITICAL
- CVE-2022-42889EG 9.8EPSS p100CRITICAL
- CVE-2020-36329EG 9.8CRITICAL
- CVE-2020-36328EG 9.8CRITICAL
Same CWE
10 shownCWE-787 · CWE-190
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2021-3520?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2021-3520 published?
Is CVE-2021-3520 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2021-3520?
How do I remediate CVE-2021-3520?
Dependency Blast Radius
See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2021-3520
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2021-3520?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.