Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop') vulnerability in Erlang OTP ssh (ssh_sftpd module) allows an authenticated SFTP user to render an SFTP channel permanently unresponsive.
The handle_data/4 function in ssh_sftpd contains a catch-all clause that accepts channel data of any type. When channel data with a non-zero type code (SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_EXTENDED_DATA) arrives with an empty pending buffer and a payload at or below the SFTP packet size limit, the clause tail-calls itself with identical arguments, creating an infinite loop.
The SFTP protocol operates exclusively on normal channel data (type 0). Extended data (non-zero type) is meaningless for SFTP and is never sent by conforming clients. However, the SSH protocol permits any channel participant to send extended data on an open channel, so an authenticated SFTP client can trigger the loop by sending SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_EXTENDED_DATA with any data_type_code and any non-empty payload at or below the size limit.
The targeted ssh_sftpd process enters an infinite tail-recursive loop. It never processes another message, its message queue grows without bound, and it can only be stopped by killing the process. BEAM's reduction-based scheduler preemption continues to function, so other processes on the node are not starved, but each stuck channel process consumes its full CPU time share continuously and accumulates unbounded message queue memory. Opening many channels amplifies the CPU and memory impact.
Erlang/OTP SSH configurations using the default max_channels setting (infinity) allow an authenticated user to open unlimited channels per connection, amplifying the attack without requiring multiple TCP connections or authentications.
No file contents, credentials, or write access are obtainable through this issue. The impact is limited to denial of service on targeted SFTP channels, with secondary CPU degradation and memory growth.
This vulnerability is associated with program file lib/ssh/src/ssh_sftpd.erl and program routine ssh_sftpd:handle_data/4.
This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 29.0.3, OTP 28.5.0.3 and OTP 27.3.4.14, corresponding to ssh from 3.0.1 before 6.0.2, 5.5.2.2 and 5.2.11.9.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (4.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 4.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v3 · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). 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.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.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
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.
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