EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
- •High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.3%CVSS: 8.2Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed
No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.
The CVE record's CNA (Eclipse Foundation) lists Eclipse Foundation Eclipse Vert.x versions 4.0.0 up to and including 4.5.34, 5.0.0 up to and including 5.0.12 and 5.1.0 up to and including 5.1.9 as affected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.
In Eclipse Vert.x versions [4.0.0, 4.5.34] or [5.0.0,5.0.12] or [5.1.0,5.1.9] or [5.2.0, 5.2.0], the Eclipse Vert.x MQTT (vertx-mqtt) MqttClient stores every inbound QoS 2 PUBLISH message received from the broker in an internal map (qos2inbound) while awaiting the corresponding PUBREL packet to complete the QoS 2 handshake. This map has no size limit; the maxInflightQueue option is enforced only on the outbound publish path and does not constrain inbound message retention.
A malicious or compromised MQTT broker can exploit this by sending QoS 2 PUBLISH messages with distinct packet identifiers and withholding the PUBREL responses. Each incomplete handshake causes the client to retain the full publish message (topic, payload, and metadata) indefinitely, leading to unbounded memory growth in the Vert.x process. This can degrade the MQTT-consuming application or cause out-of-memory termination.
The impacted component is io.vertx:vertx-mqtt.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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