The IP stack in the Linux kernel before 4.6 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (stack consumption and panic) or possibly have unspecified other impact by triggering use of the GRO path for packets with tunnel stacking, as demonstrated by interleaved IPv4 headers and GRE headers, a related issue to CVE-2016-7039.
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux_kernel | Linux | 3.14 (including) | 3.16.35 (excluding) |
| Linux_kernel | Linux | 3.17 (including) | 3.18.47 (excluding) |
| Linux_kernel | Linux | 3.19 (including) | 4.1.38 (excluding) |
| Linux_kernel | Linux | 4.2 (including) | 4.4.29 (excluding) |
| Linux_kernel | Linux | 4.5 (including) | 4.6 (excluding) |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | RedHat | kernel-rt-0:3.10.0-327.36.3.rt56.238.el7 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | RedHat | kernel-0:3.10.0-327.36.2.el7 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | RedHat | kernel-aarch64-0:4.5.0-15.2.1.el7 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 Extended Update Support | RedHat | kernel-0:3.10.0-229.46.1.el7 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise MRG 2 | RedHat | kernel-rt-1:3.10.0-327.rt56.198.el6rt | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | esm-infra-legacy/trusty | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | esm-infra/xenial | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | trusty/esm | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | vivid/ubuntu-core | * |
| Linux | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
| Linux-armadaxp | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-aws | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-flo | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-flo | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-gke | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-goldfish | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-goldfish | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-grouper | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-grouper | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-hwe | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-hwe-edge | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-linaro-omap | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-linaro-omap | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-linaro-shared | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-linaro-shared | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-linaro-vexpress | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-linaro-vexpress | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-quantal | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-lts-quantal | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-raring | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-lts-raring | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-saucy | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-lts-saucy | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-trusty | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-lts-trusty | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-utopic | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-lts-utopic | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-vivid | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-lts-vivid | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-wily | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-lts-wily | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-lts-xenial | Ubuntu | esm-infra-legacy/trusty | * |
| Linux-lts-xenial | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-lts-xenial | Ubuntu | trusty/esm | * |
| Linux-lts-xenial | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-maguro | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-maguro | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-mako | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-mako | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-manta | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Linux-manta | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-qcm-msm | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Linux-qcm-msm | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-raspi2 | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-raspi2 | Ubuntu | vivid/ubuntu-core | * |
| Linux-raspi2 | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
| Linux-snapdragon | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Linux-snapdragon | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
| Linux-snapdragon | Ubuntu | yakkety | * |
| Linux-ti-omap4 | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
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.