libatalk 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1: libatalk 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1 for Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)

libatalk 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1, released May 21, 2026, fixes 10 CVEs in libatalk. None of them is reported as exploited. Patch Radar priority: Urgent.

Urgent

CVEs closed

1 rated Critical

Exploited

None reported

Highest CVSS

9.9

Base score, 0 to 10

Highest EPSS

0.0052

44th percentile

Priority of the 10 CVEs

Patch now 0
                                Urgent 1
                                High 9
                                Routine 0

Fixed package versions

Product	Release	Fixed in
libatalk	Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)	4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1

CVEs this fix closes

Priority	CVE	Title	CVSS	EPSS	Exploitation
Urgent	CVE-2026-44050	netatalk: A heap-based buffer overflow in the CNID daemon comm_rcv() function in Netatalk 2.0.0 through 4.4.2 allows a remote a...	9.9	0.0042	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44049	netatalk: An out-of-bounds write due to improper null termination in convert_charset() in Netatalk 2.0.4 through 4.4.2 allows a...	7.5	0.0052	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44051	netatalk: An improper link resolution vulnerability in Netatalk 3.0.2 through 4.4.2 allows a remote authenticated attacker to r...	8.1	0.0048	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44048	netatalk: A stack-based buffer overflow via UCS-2 type confusion in convert_charset() in Netatalk 2.0.4 through 4.4.2 allows a...	8.8	0.0042	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44047	netatalk: An SQL injection vulnerability in the MySQL CNID backend in Netatalk 3.1.0 through 4.4.2 allows a remote authenticate...	8.8	0.0037	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44055	netatalk: A logic error involving bitwise OR operations in Netatalk 3.1.4 through 4.4.2 allows a remote authenticated attacker...	7.5	0.0036	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44062	netatalk: A missing output length bounds check in pull_charset_flags() in Netatalk 2.0.4 through 4.4.2 allows a remote authenti...	7.5	0.0036	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44060	netatalk: An integer underflow in dsi_writeinit() in Netatalk 1.5.0 through 4.4.2 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to c...	7.5	0.0033	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44052	netatalk: Netatalk 2.1.0 through 4.4.2 inserts LDAP simple-bind passwords into log output in cleartext, which allows an attacke...	7.5	0.0025	None reported
High	CVE-2026-44064	netatalk: An out-of-bounds read in ASP session ID handling in Netatalk 1.3 through 4.4.2 allows an adjacent network attacker to...	7.1	0.0017	None reported

Also fixes CVE-2026-44050

FEDORA-2026-9FD50B2FF1
netatalk, netatalk-afptest, netatalk-afptest-debuginfo and 6 more on Fedora 43
a2boot 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
a2boot on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)
atalkd 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
atalkd on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)
macipgw 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
macipgw on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)
netatalk 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
netatalk on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)
netatalk-tests 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
netatalk-tests on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)
netatalk-tools 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
netatalk-tools on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)
papd 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1
papd on Ubuntu 26.04.1 LTS (resolute)

For tools and AI agents

This page as data: JSON · Markdown

Link to this page

If this page saved you time, a link to it in your ticket, advisory or write-up helps others find it.

HTML

<a href="https://patchblox.com/security/fix/linux/ubuntu-resolute-libatalk-4.2.3-ds-2.1ubuntu0.1">libatalk 4.2.3~ds-2.1ubuntu0.1 on Patchblox Patch Radar</a>

Reusing the data? How to credit Patch Radar.

Which servers are still behind?

Patchblox compares the installed package on every Linux machine against the fixed version for its release, including machines reported through Azure Update Manager.

Get a demo

Patch Radar data is free to use with attribution. Terms and how to credit it.

Product names, logos and trademarks shown on Patch Radar belong to their respective owners. They are used only to identify the software each security fix applies to and to help readers find their platform. Their use does not imply any affiliation with, or endorsement by, those owners, and Patchblox is not affiliated with any of them.