The ldb_wildcard_compare function in ldb_match.c in ldb before 1.1.24, as used in the AD LDAP server in Samba 4.x before 4.1.22, 4.2.x before 4.2.7, and 4.3.x before 4.3.3, mishandles certain zero values, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) via crafted packets.
CVE-2015-3223
Score 5.3 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2022-05-17. NVD baseline CVSS 5.3; sources differ by 0.0.
- Lower severity and no public exploit yet
A fix is available — apply it.
Internet exposure
The internet-exposure footprint is temporarily unavailable — the KEV-Exposure radar's record for this CVE could not be loaded just now. That is not a finding of zero exposed services; please retry shortly.
- CVSS v3
- 5.3
- EG Score
- 5.3MEDIUMmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 31EG Risk 31/100CISA SSVC
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).
How it’s computedSeverity53% × 45%Exploitation7% × 40%Automatability30% × 15%CISA SSVC: Track at low or medium mission impact; Track or Attend at high (mission-essential systems).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
- 6.9%
- EPSS %ILE
- 93rd
- KEV
- Not listed
CISA SSVCTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track or 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 (no KEV listing, exploit record or EPSS ≥ 50%) · Automatable unknown (not published for this CVE) · Technical impact partial (CVSS below 9.0). Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it: high means the affected system is essential to your organisation's mission, or its compromise could cause irreversible harm to people. CISA's decision table
Published
December 29, 2015
Last Modified
May 6, 2026
References (38)
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2015-December/174076.html
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2015-December/174391.html
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2015-12/msg00019.html
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2015-12/msg00020.html
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2015-12/msg00032.html
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2015-12/msg00033.html
- secalert@redhathttp://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-04/msg00042.html
- secalert@redhathttp://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3433
- secalert@redhathttp://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/linuxbulletinjan2016-2867209.html
- secalert@redhathttp://www.securityfocus.com/bid/79731
- secalert@redhathttp://www.securitytracker.com/id/1034493
- secalert@redhathttp://www.ubuntu.com/usn/USN-2855-1
- secalert@redhathttp://www.ubuntu.com/usn/USN-2855-2
- secalert@redhathttp://www.ubuntu.com/usn/USN-2856-1
- secalert@redhathttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290287
Vendor Advisories for CVE-2015-3223(2)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
Affected Packages
(7 across 6 ecosystems)
Debian:11(2)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| ldb | — | 2:1.1.24-1 (one range) | — |
| samba | — | 2:4.1.22+dfsg-1 (one range) | — |
Debian:12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| samba | — | 2:4.1.22+dfsg-1 (one range) | — |
Debian:13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| samba | — | 2:4.1.22+dfsg-1 (one range) | — |
Debian:14(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| samba | — | 2:4.1.22+dfsg-1 (one range) | — |
Debian:7(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| samba | 2:3.6.6-6 ... 2:3.6.6-6+deb7u5~bpo60+1 (10 versions) | 2:3.6.6-6+deb7u6 (one range) | — |
Debian:8(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| samba | 2:4.1.17+dfsg-2 | 2:4.1.17+dfsg-2+deb8u1 (one range) | — |
Related CVEs(same product + same vendor)
Same product
10 shownDebian:11:ldb · Debian:7:samba
- CVE-2015-5330EG 7.5EPSS p93HIGH
- CVE-2017-7494EG 9.8 KEVEPSS p100CRITICAL
- CVE-2016-2118NVD 7.5EG 7.7EPSS p98HIGH
- CVE-2017-2619EG 7.5EPSS p96HIGH
- CVE-2017-15275EG 7.5EPSS p98HIGH
- CVE-2015-8467EG 7.5HIGH
- CVE-2015-7540EG 7.5EPSS p94HIGH
- CVE-2017-12150EG 7.4EPSS p96HIGH
- CVE-2016-2113EG 7.4HIGH
- CVE-2015-5252EG 7.2EPSS p96HIGH
Same vendor
6 shownredhat:RHSA-2016:0009 · ubuntu:USN-2855-1
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2015-3223?
When was CVE-2015-3223 disclosed?
Is CVE-2015-3223 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2015-3223?
How do I remediate CVE-2015-3223?
Dependency Blast Radius
See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2015-3223
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2015-3223?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.