A DHCP server, or anyone on the LAN who answers a DISCOVER first, can make the client read about a
kilobyte past the end of the received message.
The option walk keeps a pointer and an offset in step, and the only bound check uses the offset:
/* addons/dhcp/nxd_dhcp_client.c:7538, 7572 */while (i < length - 1)
{
...
size = *(++data); /* data moves 1: type -> length byte */
data += size + 1; /* data moves size + 1 more */
i += size + 1; /* i moves only size + 1 */
}
A TLV option occupies size + 2 bytes. data is advanced by size + 2 in total, i by size + 1, so
the offset falls one byte behind the real read position for every option the walk skips. After
enough skipped options the check i < length - 1 still holds while data is already past the end
of the message, and the subsequent read of the type and length bytes comes from whatever follows.
A single OFFER carrying a long run of skippable options is enough:
ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflowREAD of size 1 at 0x61b000000794 thread T5
#0 _nx_dhcp_search_buffer addons/dhcp/nxd_dhcp_client.c:7541
#1 _nx_dhcp_get_option_value addons/dhcp/nxd_dhcp_client.c:7082
0x61b000000794 is located 164 bytes to the right of 1648-byte region
A well formed OFFER through the same path is handled normally, the client records the offer and
moves to REQUESTING, so the difference is the option layout rather than the harness.
The read runs in the DHCP client thread while the client is still unconfigured, so it happens on
every boot in reach of a hostile DHCP responder. The values read are used to configure the
interface, which is how the disclosed bytes become observable.
Advance i by size + 2, or derive the bound from data rather than keeping a second counter.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-28). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
No fix is confirmed yet. Check the vendor's advisory for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). 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