CVE-2017-13704
high-risk
Published 2017-10-03
In dnsmasq before 2.78, if the DNS packet size does not match the expected size, the size parameter in a memset call gets a negative value. As it is an unsigned value, memset ends up writing up to 0xffffffff zero's (0xffffffffffffffff in 64 bit platforms), making dnsmasq crash.
Do I need to act?
!
79.3% chance of exploitation in next 30 days
EPSS score — higher than 21% of all CVEs
-
Not on CISA KEV list
No confirmed active exploitation reported to CISA
?
Patch status unknown
Check vendor advisories for fix availability and mitigation guidance
7
CVSS 7.5/10
High
NETWORK
/ LOW complexity
Affected Products (13)
Affected Vendors
References (24)
Release Notes
http://thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/CHANGELOG
Third Party Advisory
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/101085
Third Party Advisory
http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039474
Issue Tracking
https://access.redhat.com/security/vulnerabilities/3199382
Third Party Advisory
https://security.googleblog.com/2017/10/behind-masq-yet-more-dns-and-dhcp.html
Release Notes
http://thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/CHANGELOG
Third Party Advisory
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/101085
Third Party Advisory
http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039474
Issue Tracking
https://access.redhat.com/security/vulnerabilities/3199382
and 4 more references
63
/ 100
high-risk
Severity
26/34 · High
Exploitability
20/34 · Moderate
Exposure
17/34 · Moderate