CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2014-3687

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Published: Nov 10, 2014 | Modified: Apr 12, 2025
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
7.8 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
RedHat/V2
7.1 IMPORTANT
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

The sctp_assoc_lookup_asconf_ack function in net/sctp/associola.c in the SCTP implementation in the Linux kernel through 3.17.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (panic) via duplicate ASCONF chunks that trigger an incorrect uncork within the side-effect interpreter.

Weakness

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
Linux_kernelLinux2.6.27 (including)3.2.64 (excluding)
Linux_kernelLinux3.3 (including)3.4.107 (excluding)
Linux_kernelLinux3.5 (including)3.10.61 (excluding)
Linux_kernelLinux3.11 (including)3.12.34 (excluding)
Linux_kernelLinux3.13 (including)3.14.25 (excluding)
Linux_kernelLinux3.15 (including)3.16.35 (excluding)
Linux_kernelLinux3.17 (including)3.17.4 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6RedHatkernel-0:2.6.32-504.3.3.el6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 Advanced Update SupportRedHatkernel-0:2.6.32-220.58.1.el6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4 Extended Update SupportRedHatkernel-0:2.6.32-358.55.1.el6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.5 Extended Update SupportRedHatkernel-0:2.6.32-431.46.2.el6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7RedHatkernel-0:3.10.0-123.13.1.el7*
LinuxUbuntuesm-infra-legacy/trusty*
LinuxUbuntulucid*
LinuxUbuntuprecise*
LinuxUbuntuprecise/esm*
LinuxUbuntutrusty*
LinuxUbuntutrusty/esm*
LinuxUbuntuupstream*
LinuxUbuntuutopic*
Linux-2.6Ubuntuupstream*
Linux-armadaxpUbuntuprecise*
Linux-armadaxpUbuntuupstream*
Linux-awsUbuntuupstream*
Linux-ec2Ubuntulucid*
Linux-ec2Ubuntuupstream*
Linux-floUbuntutrusty*
Linux-floUbuntuupstream*
Linux-floUbuntuutopic*
Linux-floUbuntuvivid*
Linux-floUbuntuvivid/stable-phone-overlay*
Linux-floUbuntuwily*
Linux-floUbuntuxenial*
Linux-floUbuntuyakkety*
Linux-fsl-imx51Ubuntulucid*
Linux-fsl-imx51Ubuntuupstream*
Linux-gkeUbuntuupstream*
Linux-goldfishUbuntutrusty*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuupstream*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuutopic*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuvivid*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuwily*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuxenial*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuyakkety*
Linux-goldfishUbuntuzesty*
Linux-grouperUbuntutrusty*
Linux-grouperUbuntuupstream*
Linux-grouperUbuntuutopic*
Linux-hweUbuntuupstream*
Linux-hwe-edgeUbuntuupstream*
Linux-linaro-omapUbuntuprecise*
Linux-linaro-omapUbuntuupstream*
Linux-linaro-sharedUbuntuprecise*
Linux-linaro-sharedUbuntuupstream*
Linux-linaro-vexpressUbuntuprecise*
Linux-linaro-vexpressUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-quantalUbuntuprecise*
Linux-lts-quantalUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-raringUbuntuprecise*
Linux-lts-raringUbuntuprecise/esm*
Linux-lts-raringUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-saucyUbuntuprecise*
Linux-lts-saucyUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-trustyUbuntuprecise*
Linux-lts-trustyUbuntuprecise/esm*
Linux-lts-trustyUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-utopicUbuntutrusty*
Linux-lts-utopicUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-vividUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-wilyUbuntuupstream*
Linux-lts-xenialUbuntuupstream*
Linux-maguroUbuntutrusty*
Linux-maguroUbuntuupstream*
Linux-makoUbuntutrusty*
Linux-makoUbuntuupstream*
Linux-makoUbuntuutopic*
Linux-makoUbuntuvivid*
Linux-makoUbuntuvivid/stable-phone-overlay*
Linux-makoUbuntuwily*
Linux-makoUbuntuxenial*
Linux-makoUbuntuyakkety*
Linux-mantaUbuntutrusty*
Linux-mantaUbuntuupstream*
Linux-mantaUbuntuutopic*
Linux-mantaUbuntuvivid*
Linux-mantaUbuntuwily*
Linux-mvl-doveUbuntulucid*
Linux-mvl-doveUbuntuupstream*
Linux-qcm-msmUbuntulucid*
Linux-qcm-msmUbuntuprecise*
Linux-qcm-msmUbuntuupstream*
Linux-raspi2Ubuntuupstream*
Linux-raspi2Ubuntuvivid/ubuntu-core*
Linux-snapdragonUbuntuupstream*
Linux-ti-omap4Ubuntuprecise*
Linux-ti-omap4Ubuntuupstream*

Potential Mitigations

  • Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:

  • The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.

  • The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.

References