In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sctp: validate embedded address parameter length
sctp_verify_asconf() and sctp_verify_param() only validate ADD_IP, DEL_IP,
and SET_PRIMARY parameters against a fixed minimum size of sizeof(struct
sctp_addip_param) + sizeof(struct sctp_paramhdr). This ensures the outer
parameter is large enough to contain an embedded address parameter header,
but does not verify that the embedded address parameter's declared length
fits within the bounds of the outer parameter.
Later, sctp_process_param() and sctp_process_asconf_param() extract the
embedded address parameter and pass it to af->from_addr_param(), which uses
the address parameter length to parse the variable-length address payload.
A malformed peer can therefore advertise an embedded address parameter
length that exceeds the remaining bytes in the enclosing parameter.
Validate that addr_param->p.length does not exceed the space available
after the sctp_addip_param header before processing the embedded address
parameter. Reject malformed parameters when the embedded address length
extends beyond the enclosing parameter bounds.
This prevents out-of-bounds reads when parsing malformed parameters carried
in INIT or ASCONF processing paths.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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)14 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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