Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessReach tftpd with remap jump rules enabled
-
ExploitSend TFTP RRQ/WRQ filename matching a jump rule
-
ExecutionTrigger out-of-bounds heap read in rewrite_string()
-
ImpactCrash forked in.tftpd request handler
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
ASVS 5.0
V15 - Secure Coding and Architecture Bounds checking, read limits
MITRE ATT&CK
1 technique across 1 tactic: Collection The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Exploitation requires in.tftpd to be running with the remap feature enabled (the tftpd '-m'/mapfile option pointing to a remap ruleset) AND that ruleset must contain at least one 'jump' rule; the attacker then sends a TFTP read or write request whose filename matches that jump rule. This is NOT a default configuration - tftpd deployments launched without a remap mapfile are not affected. Further limiting factors: the impact is confined to crashing the per-request forked child handler rather than taking down the listening daemon, so the practical effect is degraded/aborted individual transfers rather than full service loss; affected versions are tftp-hpa 5.4 up to (but not including) 6.0. |
| Impact | The vendor-supplied CVSS 4.0 vector (CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L) scores 6.3 (medium) and is internally consistent with the description: network-reachable (AV:N), unauthenticated (PR:N), no user interaction (UI:N), but carrying an explicit Attack Requirement (AT:P) and only a low availability impact (VA:L) with no confidentiality or integrity impact. The AT:P flag is the key signal - it reflects that exploitation is not possible against a stock daemon but only one configured with remap jump rules, which tempers the otherwise alarming 'unauthenticated remote' profile. No EPSS score, SSVC decision, KEV listing, or public POC was provided in the input, so exploitation likelihood cannot be quantified; the status is no public exploit identified at time of analysis. Note a conflict in the metadata: the CVE carries an 'Information Disclosure' tag and is classified CWE-125 (out-of-bounds read), yet the description and the VC:N/VI:N metrics indicate the only realized effect is a crash of the per-request forked handler - this is effectively a limited denial-of-service, not information disclosure, and defenders should not treat it as a data-exposure issue. Net: this is a genuine but modest-priority bug - remote and unauthenticated, but gated behind a non-default feature and limited to crashing a single forked child rather than the whole service. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An attacker who can reach an in.tftpd instance that has been started with the remap feature enabled sends a TFTP read or write request whose filename matches a remap 'jump' rule, triggering an out-of-bounds heap read in rewrite_string() that crashes the forked request handler. No authentication is required, but the attack only works where remap jump rules are configured. No public proof-of-concept is identified in the provided data. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Oct 06, 2026
An out-of-bounds heap read in tftp-hpa's rewrite_string() function (tftpd/remap.c) lets an unauthenticated remote attacker send a TFTP read or write request whose filename matches a configured remap 'jump' rule, causing the forked in.tftpd request handler to read past the end of a heap buffer and crash. Only tftp-hpa 5.4 through versions before 6.0 are affected, and exploitation is not possible in a default deployment: the daemon must be started with the remap feature enabled (the tftpd '-m'/mapfile option) and the rule set must contain at least one jump rule. The vendor-supplied CVSS 4.0 vector scores this 6.3 (medium), but the impact is limited to a low availability effect - the crashed process is the per-request child, not the listening daemon, so the practical result is aborted individual transfers rather than full service loss; no public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis and there is no confirmed active exploitation (not in CISA KEV).
RemediationAI
Apply the vendor fix: upgrade to tftp-hpa 6.0 or later, or backport the upstream patch commit https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/network/tftp/tftp-hpa.git/commit/?id=6735086fb6475c3e1f1daf9829836b3d06f14291 which bounds the jump-label search in rewrite_string(); the 5.4-to-6.0 range is the affected window, so staying on 5.4 is not a safe option. Where an immediate upgrade is not possible, the most effective workaround is to disable the remap feature entirely by removing the tftpd '-m'/mapfile option and restarting in.tftpd - the trade-off is loss of filename rewriting/mapping, but deployments without remap are structurally immune. If remapping must be retained, audit the mapfile and eliminate all 'jump' rules, since the fault is reached only through jump-label matching; this preserves simple rewrite rules while removing the vulnerable path, at the cost of any workflow that depends on jumping between rule sets. Because exploitation is unauthenticated and network-reachable, additionally restrict TFTP access to trusted networks or host allow-lists and firewall UDP/69 where the service need not be publicly exposed, and monitor in.tftpd for repeated child-process crashes, which indicate probing of the vulnerable path. Note that the crash is confined to the forked per-request handler, so availability of the listening daemon is degraded rather than fully lost.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affected Packages
Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)
Affects your stack
Affects 1 package in euvd
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
tftp-hpa is a widely packaged implementation of the Trivial File Transfer Protocol daemon (in.tftpd), tracked under the CPE cpe:2.3:a:h._peter_anvin:tftp-hpa. TFTP is a UDP-based, unauthenticated file transfer protocol, and tftpd supports an optional filename-rewriting/mapping layer configured through a remap rule file referenced with the '-m' option; the parser and rule engine for that layer live in tftpd/remap.c. The vulnerability is an out-of-bounds read (CWE-125) inside rewrite_string(): while searching for and matching jump labels, the code walks heap memory without correctly bounding the scan, so a rule set containing a 'jump' rule can cause the routine to read beyond an allocated buffer. Because TFTP servers fork a separate in.tftpd child handler per request, the fault is contained to that child, which terminates; the parent listener is unaffected. This is an information-disclosure-class defect in the read access sense, but in practice it manifests as a crash of the request handler rather than leaked data. The root cause is missing bounds validation on the jump-label search path, fixed upstream by the referenced tftp-hpa commit.
Know when Tftp Hpa 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
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Remote and unauthenticated (AV:N/PR:N), but the required non-default remap jump-rule configuration is modeled as AC:H in 3.1, and impact is limited to crashing a forked child so A:L with no C/I impact.
Primary rating from Vendor (VulnCheck).
CVSS VectorVendor: VulnCheck
DescriptionCVE.org
tftp-hpa 5.4 before 6.0 contains an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in rewrite_string() in tftpd/remap.c that walks heap memory during jump label searches. Unauthenticated remote attackers can send read or write requests whose filename matches a remap jump rule to crash the forked in.tftpd request handler.
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.
Information disclosure occurs when an application unintentionally exposes sensitive data that aids attackers in reconnaissance or directly compromises security.
EUVD-2026-93395
GHSA-w9pp-27r4-r6rj
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
Exploit-DB