Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessControl a guest VM on host
-
DeliverySend crafted DHCPv6 CLIENTID or TFTP blksize option
-
ExploitOverflow libslirp reply buffer (small MTU)
-
ExecutionCorrupt host process heap
-
ImpactDoS or code execution in host
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
ASVS 5.0
V15 - Secure Coding and Architecture Bounds checking, write limits
MITRE ATT&CK
2 techniques across 2 tactics: Execution, Privilege Escalation The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Requires the host to be configured with a small, non-default interface MTU - the description explicitly states the default MTU is not affected, which is the primary limiting factor. The attacker must control a guest that can reach libslirp's built-in DHCPv6 and TFTP services and supply a malicious DHCPv6 CLIENTID option or TFTP blksize option. This is a guest-to-host attack surface (QEMU user networking / slirp4netns rootless containers), so exploitation is gated on running libslirp with that misconfiguration; hosts on the default MTU are not exposed. AC:H reflects the non-default configuration dependency. |
| Impact | The Red Hat CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H = 7.4 High) tells a nuanced story. AC:H and the description's explicit 'small interface MTU' precondition are the dominant risk-limiting signals: the default MTU is NOT affected, so exploitation is confined to non-default configurations. AV:N/PR:N reflect that any guest reaching libslirp's built-in DHCPv6/TFTP services can trigger the flaw without extra credentials, but 'network' here effectively means guest-to-host reachability of the emulated network stack, not open Internet exposure. Impact is I:H/A:H with C:N - consistent with a heap write-overflow primitive (memory corruption/code-exec write path) rather than a read/disclosure bug. No EPSS score, no CISA KEV listing, and no POC were provided, so there is no evidence of active exploitation or ease-of-automation. Net: this is a legitimately serious guest-to-host memory-corruption bug worth patching in virtualization/container hosts, but the non-default MTU gate plus AC:H make it a targeted, configuration-dependent issue rather than a mass-exploitable emergency. One caveat to verify: a guest overflowing the host (QEMU/slirp4netns) process arguably warrants S:C (scope change across the VM boundary); Red Hat scored S:U, which is more conservative. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | On a virtualization or rootless-container host where libslirp user-mode networking is configured with a small (non-default) interface MTU, an attacker who controls a guest VM sends a crafted DHCPv6 CLIENTID option or an oversized TFTP blksize option to the emulated network services. The response builder overflows the reply buffer with attacker-controlled length and content, crashing the host process (DoS) or potentially achieving code execution in the host process context. No public exploit code was identified at time of analysis. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Sep 22, 2026
Heap-based buffer overflow in libslirp's DHCPv6 and TFTP reply builders lets a malicious guest write attacker-controlled content and length past the end of the host-side reply buffer, causing host process crashes (denial of service) and potentially arbitrary code execution in the host. The flaw only manifests when the host interface is configured with a small, non-default MTU - the default MTU is explicitly unaffected - and requires the guest to reach libslirp's built-in DHCPv6 or TFTP service, which makes this a guest-to-host escape surface for QEMU user networking and slirp4netns rootless containers. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8, 9 and 10 and OpenShift Container Platform 4 ship affected builds; no public exploit code and no confirmed active exploitation were identified at time of analysis, and the assessed vector is unauthenticated (PR:N) but high complexity (AC:H) because of the configuration prerequisite.
RemediationAI
No vendor-released patch version is identified in the available data; Red Hat's CVE page (https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-95508) and Bugzilla entry (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2537748) should be tracked for the fixed libslirp and qemu-kvm/slirp4netns package versions and applied through normal RHEL and OpenShift update channels as soon as they publish. Because exploitation depends entirely on the non-default small interface MTU, the most effective immediate mitigation is to keep the virtual interface MTU at its default (typically 1500) on all QEMU user-networking and slirp4netns interfaces; the trade-off is that this removes support for deliberate small-MTU or jumbo-framing configurations, which is acceptable for most deployments. If small MTUs are genuinely required, disable the affected emulated services rather than reducing MTU: launch QEMU without DHCPv6/TFTP reply support where the guest can be given static addressing (e.g. avoid slirp DHCPv6 and TFTP options, or use a bridged/rootless setup that bypasses libslirp's built-in servers), or remove TFTP boot and DHCPv6 autoconfiguration from the guest workload - the trade-off is loss of automatic network configuration, requiring manual addressing. Additionally, treat guests as untrusted: restrict which workloads may run with user-mode networking, avoid running privileged or multi-tenant guests over slirp on hosts with non-default MTUs, and monitor for unexpected crashes of the qemu or slirp4netns host process, which may indicate exploitation attempts. Note that the assessed vector is Scope:Changed, so a compromise of the host process is a boundary crossing out of the guest, and standard per-guest confinement (SELinux, seccomp, non-root container users) should be retained as defense in depth even after patching.
Affects your stack
Find out whether the stacks and servers you run are on an affected version.
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
libslirp is a userspace TCP/IP stack used by QEMU's "-net user" (slirp) backend and by slirp4netns for rootless containers; it implements emulated network services - including DHCPv6 and TFTP - that respond to requests originating from the guest. CWE-787 (out-of-bounds write) is the root cause: when building the DHCPv6 reply, the library copies the guest-supplied CLIENTID option into a fixed reply buffer, and when building the TFTP reply it uses the guest-supplied blksize option to size that buffer, so a malicious or compromised guest can supply a value whose content and length exceed the available space. The overflow writes attacker-influenced bytes past the heap allocation inside the host process, corrupting heap metadata and adjacent objects. The CVSS vector AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N with C:N/I:H/A:H reflects unauthenticated network-reachable input that requires the non-default small-MTU configuration to become reachable; the independent assessment raises the scope to S:C because the guest, not the host, is the source of the malicious input crossing a virtualization boundary. Affected CPEs cover Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8, 9 and 10 and Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 (multiple streams), confirming both traditional virtualization hosts and OpenShift node/rootless-container usage.
Know when Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
AC:H for the required non-default small MTU; PR:N since any guest can send the options; S:C because the guest corrupts the separate host process; C:N as the primitive is a write, I:H/A:H for corruption and DoS.
AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Primary rating from Vendor (redhat).
CVSS VectorVendor: redhat
DescriptionCVE.org
A heap-based buffer overflow was found in the DHCPv6 and TFTP response builders of libslirp. When the host is configured with a small interface MTU, a guest-supplied DHCPv6 CLIENTID option or TFTP blksize option can overflow the reply buffer with attacker-controlled content and length, resulting in denial of service and potentially arbitrary code execution in the host process. The default interface MTU is not affected.
Executive ViewAI
A heap-based buffer overflow in libslirp, the user-mode networking component embedded in QEMU and slirp4netns, affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8, 9, 10 and OpenShift Container Platform 4. A malicious guest workload that reaches libslirp's built-in DHCPv6 or TFTP service could crash the host-side process and potentially execute code on the host, making this a guest-to-host escape surface for virtualization and rootless-container platforms, although exploitation requires a non-default reduced MTU configuration (the default MTU is unaffected) and no public exploit code or confirmed active exploitation was identified at time of analysis. Leadership should care because it crosses a trust boundary: tenants running untrusted VMs or containers on shared infrastructure could affect the host, not just their own workload.
No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations: revert affected interfaces to the default MTU, since the default MTU is explicitly unaffected by the flaw; disable or block access to libslirp's built-in DHCPv6 and TFTP services where they are not required; ensure untrusted guests cannot reach those services through host-side network isolation; substitute alternative networking backends (tap/bridge) for user-mode networking on multi-tenant or externally exposed systems; and monitor for abnormal host-process crashes in QEMU or slirp4netns as a potential indicator of attempted exploitation.
Threat Intelligence Overview
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
A buffer overflow occurs when a program writes more data to a memory buffer than it was allocated to hold, causing the excess data to spill into adjacent memory regions.
Memory corruption occurs when a program writes data beyond the boundaries of allocated memory regions or accesses memory in unintended ways, violating the integrity of the process's address space.
Remote Code Execution represents the critical moment when an attacker successfully runs arbitrary code on a target system without physical access.
Denial of Service attacks render applications or systems unavailable by overwhelming resources or triggering failure conditions.
Affected Products (CPE)CVE.org
More in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
View allHeap corruption via double-free in 389-ds-base's LDAP control parsing allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to crash
Remote code execution in Cockpit's web interface allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands on the h
Remote code execution in Samba's printing subsystem allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary shell commands via craft
Ghostscript can execute arbitrary shell commands with the privileges of its process when it renders a crafted PostScript
Authentication bypass in 389 Directory Server (shipped as Red Hat Directory Server 11-13 and within RHEL 6-10) lets remo
Remote code execution and privilege escalation in HPLIP (HP Linux Imaging and Printing) affects the hpcups print filter
Unauthenticated privilege escalation in FreeIPA (Red Hat Identity Management) allows a remote attacker to gain genuine a
A heap buffer overflow exists in libsoup's WebSocket permessage-deflate compression path: when a very large outbound mes
Remote code execution in libarchive on 32-bit systems allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via spe
Unauthenticated path traversal in gvproxy, the network forwarder shipped in the gvisor-tap-vsock package (used by Podman
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow (the embedded web server underpinning JBoss EAP, Red Hat Data Grid, and Apache Camel
HTTP request smuggling in Red Hat Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls
Same weakness CWE-787 – Out-of-bounds Write
View allVendor StatusVendor
SUSE
Severity: Moderate| Product | Status |
|---|---|
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Micro 5.3 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Micro 5.4 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Micro 5.5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP7 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP7 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 16.0 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 16.1 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP7 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.0 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.1 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Micro 6.0 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Micro 6.1 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Micro 6.2 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 16.0 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP4-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP5-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP6 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Server Applications 15 SP4 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP4 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP4-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP5-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP6 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP6-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP4 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP6 | Affected |
| SUSE Enterprise Storage 7.1 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP6 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP3 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP3-ESPOS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP3-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP4 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP4-ESPOS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP5-ESPOS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Micro 5.1 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Micro 5.2 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Server Applications 15 SP3 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Real Time 15 SP3 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Real Time 15 SP4 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP3 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP3-BCL | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP3-LTSS | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP3 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Proxy 4.2 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Proxy 4.3 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Proxy LTS 4.3 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Retail Branch Server 4.2 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Retail Branch Server 4.3 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Retail Branch Server LTS 4.3 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Server 4.2 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Server 4.3 | Affected |
| SUSE Manager Server LTS 4.3 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 15.3 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 15.4 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 15.5 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 15.6 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap Micro 5.2 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap Micro 5.3 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap Micro 5.4 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap Micro 5.5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for NVIDIA 16.1 | Affected |
EUVD-2026-84336
GHSA-3qjr-gg7g-qcrr
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
VulDB
Exploit-DB