Skip to main content
View

Attack ChainAIDerived

Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain

  1. Access
    Reach LDAP port over network
  2. Delivery
    Open connections up to worker-pool size
  3. Exploit
    Send complete op then partial LDAPMessage
  4. Execution
    Second worker blocks on connection mutex
  5. Persist
    Worker pool fully exhausted
  6. Impact
    Service denied to all clients

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A06:2025 - Insecure Design
ASVS 5.0
V2 - Validation and Business Logic Resource consumption limits
MITRE ATT&CK

1 technique across 1 tactic: Impact

The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up.

Exploitation Conditions

No special product configuration is required - the description states the entire worker-thread pool is exhausted under default configuration, affecting anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS clients. The only prerequisites are network reachability to the LDAP service and the ability to open and hold a small number of concurrent connections proportional to the configured worker-thread count. Limiting factors that reduce real-world risk: the attacker must maintain the connections for the duration of the outage (denial lasts only while connections are held), impact is confined to availability (no data disclosure or integrity loss), the connection-hold time per thread is governed by the nsslapd-ioblocktimeout setting, and exposure is bounded by whether the directory server's LDAP port is reachable from untrusted networks versus a restricted management segment.

Impact

This is a genuine, prioritizable availability risk against the specific population of hosts running 389-ds-base / Red Hat Directory Server, though not a universal emergency. The provided CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/C:N/I:N/A:H, base 7.5) is internally consistent with the description: it is a network-reachable, low-complexity, unauthenticated condition with pure availability impact (CWE-400 resource exhaustion), and my independent assessment agrees with every metric. The real-world attractiveness is elevated beyond a typical DoS because the attack is cheap and deterministic - exhaustion requires only a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool, not a volumetric flood - and it defeats TLS/plaintext and authenticated/anonymous clients alike, so network-layer rate limiting and auth gating do not mitigate it. Signals are, however, limited and partly absent: no EPSS score was provided, the CVE is not listed in CISA KEV, and no public exploit code is referenced, so there is no public exploit identified at time of analysis and no evidence of active exploitation. The absence of EPSS/KEV/POC is not itself reassuring given how mechanically simple the described technique is, but it does mean urgency rests on exposure (is LDAP reachable by untrusted networks?) rather than on observed in-the-wild activity. Net: treat as a real patch priority for internet- or multi-tenant-exposed directory servers, and lower priority where LDAP is reachable only from trusted management networks.

Exploit ScenarioDerived

An attacker with network access to the LDAP port opens a handful of connections and, on each, sends one complete LDAP operation immediately followed by the opening bytes of a second, deliberately incomplete LDAPMessage. Each such connection captures a worker thread that then blocks on the connection mutex until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout expires; repeating this across a few connections sized to the worker-thread pool starves all workers and denies service to every client for as long as the connections are held. No public exploit code is referenced, but the technique as described is simple and reliably reproducible.

This Week Schedule remediation this week. Why: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9).
No patch listed yet 0.3% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – Oct 01, 2026

Denial of service in 389-ds-base (the LDAP engine shipped with Red Hat Directory Server 11/12/13 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 through 10) lets an unauthenticated remote attacker stall the server's worker-thread pool by sending a complete LDAP operation followed by the opening bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection. The server then hands the connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed; the second worker blocks on the connection mutex until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout, so the finished operation's response is never delivered. Repeating this over a handful of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread count exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying LDAP service to anonymous and authenticated clients over both plaintext and TLS for as long as the attacker holds the connections; no public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, and no EPSS or KEV signal accompanies the CVE, though the availability-only impact (CVSS 7.5, AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) is genuine for any internet- or broad-network-reachable directory server.

RemediationAI

No vendor-released patch version is identified in the available intelligence; track Red Hat's advisory at https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-86344 and Bugzilla bug 2529329 for the 389-ds-base errata that will address the worker-thread hand-off and connection-mutex handling, and apply it as soon as it is published for the RHDS 11/12/13 and RHEL 6-10 packages in use. Until then, the highest-value compensating control is to restrict network reachability to LDAP (389/tcp) and LDAPS (636/tcp) so only trusted clients, management segments, or a hardened LDAP proxy/load balancer can open connections; the trade-off is that legitimate remote or directory-integrated clients must be explicitly allow-listed, and the protection fails for any client network that is itself compromised or spoofable. A connection-level limiter in front of the server (per-source-IP concurrent connection caps, or a reverse proxy that enforces strict LDAP message framing and rejects pipelined/partial messages) directly attacks the exhaustion primitive, but must be sized below the worker-thread pool and can introduce latency or drop legitimate long-lived connections. Lowering nsslapd-ioblocktimeout shortens how long each blocked worker holds the mutex and thus slows the attack, at the cost of prematurely failing slow-but-legitimate operations and clients on high-latency links, while increasing the worker-thread pool only raises the number of connections required and does not eliminate the defect. Because the denial persists only while the attacker's connections are held, connection-reset or idle-connection reaping at the network edge is a useful backstop, but none of these measures is a substitute for the vendor fix.

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

389-ds-base is the open-source LDAP directory server engine that powers Red Hat Directory Server (RHDS 11, 12, and 13) and is also packaged for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, as reflected in the affected CPE strings. The root cause is CWE-400 (Uncontrolled Resource Consumption), realized here as a concurrency/lifecycle defect rather than a size-of-input issue: 389-ds-base uses a fixed pool of worker threads that pull connections from a queue, and protection of each connection is serialized through a connection mutex. When a client pipelines a fully-formed LDAP operation plus a partial, still-arriving LDAPMessage on the same TCP connection, the connection is re-queued to a second worker thread before the first worker has flushed the completed operation's result; the second worker then blocks on the connection mutex while waiting for the remainder of the truncated BER-encoded LDAPMessage, up to the nsslapd-ioblocktimeout limit. Because that blocked worker occupies a pooled thread, an attacker only needs a small number of such connections-roughly proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size, per the advisory-to consume the pool entirely. The vulnerability sits in the LDAP protocol handling/framing layer (TCP ports 389 and 636), is reachable without authentication (CVSS vector PR:N), and requires no special server configuration because the exhaustion occurs under defaults; the assessed scope is unchanged (S:U) and the effect is purely availability (C:N/I:N/A:H).

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

Vendor (redhat) PRIMARY 7.5 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
vuln.today AI 7.5 HIGH

Network-reachable and unauthenticated (AV:N/PR:N/UI:N), deterministic low-effort trigger (AC:L), impact is availability-only resource exhaustion (C:N/I:N/A:H) with no scope change.

3.1 AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
4.0 AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
SUSE 5.9 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Red Hat 7.5 HIGH

Primary rating from Vendor (redhat).

CVSS VectorVendor: redhat

Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
None
User Interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

DescriptionCVE.org

A flaw was found in 389-ds-base. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a complete LDAP operation followed by the first bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection, causing the server to hand that connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed. The second worker blocks until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout while holding the connection mutex, preventing delivery of the completed operation's result. Repeating this across a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying service to all clients (anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS) for as long as the attacker maintains the connections.

Executive ViewAI

Why It Matters

Red Hat Directory Server 11, 12, and 13 - together with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 through 10 - ship 389-ds-base, the LDAP engine that many enterprises rely on for authentication, authorization, and directory lookups. A remote attacker can exhaust the server's worker-thread pool using only a handful of crafted connections, denying LDAP service over both plaintext and TLS for as long as the attacker holds those connections. No vendor-released patch has been identified and no public exploit code exists at time of analysis, but because this component is typically a central identity dependency, sustained unavailability could cascade into authentication failures across SSO, VPN, email, and line-of-business applications.

Business Impact: High
Compensating Controls

No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations: restrict LDAP/LDAPS (TCP 389/636) to trusted clients via network ACLs, firewalls, and security groups; front directory servers with an LDAP-aware proxy or load balancer enforcing per-source connection limits and idle timeouts; reduce nsslapd-ioblocktimeout to limit how long a stalled worker blocks a connection; disable anonymous bind where feasible; monitor connection counts and worker-thread utilization for the stall pattern; and maintain replica failover capacity to shed load from an affected node.

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.3%
Top 74% exploitable
Prevalence
Medium
enterprise directory/identity backend, common in RHEL/FreeIPA but not universal
Social Media
1
Sightings
Data Quality
5 sources
Confidence: Medium

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.

SignalValue
Severity HIGH
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.3%
Patch available No
Active threat No
Deciding rule
HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9)
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision
Scheduled
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Open
Automatable
Yes
Human Impact
High
Technical Impact
Partial

Priority Score

38
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +38
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

Attack Technique

Denial of Service attacks render applications or systems unavailable by overwhelming resources or triggering failure conditions.

Affected Products (CPE)CVE.org

cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_directory_server_11:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_directory_server_11:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_directory_server_12:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_directory_server_12:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_directory_server_13:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_10:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_6:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_7:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_8:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_8:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_9:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
CVE-2026-18663 MEDIUM
5.9 Aug 12

Heap corruption via double-free in 389-ds-base's LDAP control parsing allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to crash

CVE-2026-4631 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Apr 07

Remote code execution in Cockpit's web interface allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands on the h

CVE-2026-4480 CRITICAL POC
9.0 May 26

Remote code execution in Samba's printing subsystem allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary shell commands via craft

CVE-2026-101258 HIGH POC
7.8 Oct 06

Ghostscript can execute arbitrary shell commands with the privileges of its process when it renders a crafted PostScript

CVE-2026-18922 CRITICAL
9.8 Sep 07

Authentication bypass in 389 Directory Server (shipped as Red Hat Directory Server 11-13 and within RHEL 6-10) lets remo

CVE-2026-14544 CRITICAL
9.8 Jul 03

Remote code execution and privilege escalation in HPLIP (HP Linux Imaging and Printing) affects the hpcups print filter

CVE-2026-76578 CRITICAL
9.8 Sep 07

Unauthenticated privilege escalation in FreeIPA (Red Hat Identity Management) allows a remote attacker to gain genuine a

CVE-2026-102560 CRITICAL
9.8 Sep 29

A heap buffer overflow exists in libsoup's WebSocket permessage-deflate compression path: when a very large outbound mes

CVE-2026-5121 HIGH
7.5 Mar 30

Remote code execution in libarchive on 32-bit systems allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via spe

CVE-2026-107935 CRITICAL
9.3 Oct 09

Unauthenticated path traversal in gvproxy, the network forwarder shipped in the gvisor-tap-vsock package (used by Podman

CVE-2026-28369 CRITICAL
9.1 Mar 27

HTTP request smuggling in Undertow (the embedded web server underpinning JBoss EAP, Red Hat Data Grid, and Apache Camel

CVE-2026-28368 CRITICAL
9.1 Mar 27

HTTP request smuggling in Red Hat Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls

Vendor StatusVendor

SUSE

Severity: Moderate
Product Status
SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Server Applications 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

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy