CVE-2016-10142
IPv6 Protocol Vulnerability: ICMPv6 Packet Too Big (PTB) Message Handling
Description
An issue was discovered in the IPv6 protocol specification, related to ICMP Packet Too Big (PTB) messages. (The scope of this CVE is all affected IPv6 implementations from all vendors.) The security implications of IP fragmentation have been discussed at length in [RFC6274] and [RFC7739]. An attacker can leverage the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments to trigger the use of fragmentation in an arbitrary IPv6 flow (in scenarios in which actual fragmentation of packets is not needed) and can subsequently perform any type of fragmentation-based attack against legacy IPv6 nodes that do not implement [RFC6946]. That is, employing fragmentation where not actually needed allows for fragmentation-based attack vectors to be employed, unnecessarily. We note that, unfortunately, even nodes that already implement [RFC6946] can be subject to DoS attacks as a result of the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments. Let us assume that Host A is communicating with Host B and that, as a result of the widespread dropping of IPv6 packets that contain extension headers (including fragmentation) [RFC7872], some intermediate node filters fragments between Host B and Host A. If an attacker sends a forged ICMPv6 PTB error message to Host B, reporting an MTU smaller than 1280, this will trigger the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments from that moment on (as required by [RFC2460]). When Host B starts sending IPv6 atomic fragments (in response to the received ICMPv6 PTB error message), these packets will be dropped, since we previously noted that IPv6 packets with extension headers were being dropped between Host B and Host A. Thus, this situation will result in a DoS scenario. Another possible scenario is that in which two BGP peers are employing IPv6 transport and they implement Access Control Lists (ACLs) to drop IPv6 fragments (to avoid control-plane attacks). If the aforementioned BGP peers drop IPv6 fragments but still honor received ICMPv6 PTB error messages, an attacker could easily attack the corresponding peering session by simply sending an ICMPv6 PTB message with a reported MTU smaller than 1280 bytes. Once the attack packet has been sent, the aforementioned routers will themselves be the ones dropping their own traffic.
INFO
Published Date :
Jan. 14, 2017, 7:59 a.m.
Last Modified :
Nov. 7, 2023, 2:29 a.m.
Source :
[email protected]
Remotely Exploitable :
Yes !
Impact Score :
4.0
Exploitability Score :
3.9
References to Advisories, Solutions, and Tools
Here, you will find a curated list of external links that provide in-depth
information, practical solutions, and valuable tools related to
CVE-2016-10142
.
We scan GitHub repositories to detect new proof-of-concept exploits. Following list is a collection of public exploits and proof-of-concepts, which have been published on GitHub (sorted by the most recently updated).
Results are limited to the first 15 repositories due to potential performance issues.
The following list is the news that have been mention
CVE-2016-10142
vulnerability anywhere in the article.
The following table lists the changes that have been made to the
CVE-2016-10142
vulnerability over time.
Vulnerability history details can be useful for understanding the evolution of a vulnerability, and for identifying the most recent changes that may impact the vulnerability's severity, exploitability, or other characteristics.
-
CVE Modified by [email protected]
May. 14, 2024
Action Type Old Value New Value -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Nov. 07, 2023
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference MITRE https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K57211290?utm_source=f5support&%3Butm_medium=RSS [No types assigned] Removed Reference MITRE https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K57211290?utm_source=f5support&utm_medium=RSS -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Oct. 09, 2019
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K57211290?utm_source=f5support&utm_medium=RSS [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
May. 11, 2018
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA43730 [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Jan. 05, 2018
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0817.html [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Jul. 11, 2017
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038256 [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Jan. 28, 2017
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/95797 [No Types Assigned] -
Initial Analysis by [email protected]
Jan. 19, 2017
Action Type Old Value New Value Added CVSS V2 (AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P) Added CVSS V3 AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H Changed Reference Type https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-atomfrag-generation-08 No Types Assigned https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-atomfrag-generation-08 Third Party Advisory Changed Reference Type https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8021 No Types Assigned https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8021 Third Party Advisory Added CWE CWE-17 Added CPE Configuration OR *cpe:2.3:a:ietf:ipv6:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration
While CVE identifies
specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorizes the common flaws or
weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2016-10142
is
associated with the following CWEs:
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification
(CAPEC)
stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and
approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2016-10142
weaknesses.
Exploit Prediction
EPSS is a daily estimate of the probability of exploitation activity being observed over the next 30 days.
0.65 }} 0.00%
score
0.76203
percentile