Memcached version 1.5.5 contains an Insufficient Control of Network Message Volume (Network Amplification, CWE-406) vulnerability in the UDP support of the memcached server that can result in denial of service via network flood (traffic amplification of 1:50,000 has been reported by reliable sources). This attack appear to be exploitable via network connectivity to port 11211 UDP. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 1.5.6 due to the disabling of the UDP protocol by default.
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Memcached | Memcached | 1.5.5 (including) | 1.5.5 (including) |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 10.0 (Newton) | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-heat-templates-0:5.3.10-1.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 10.0 (Newton) | RedHat | puppet-tripleo-0:5.6.8-6.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 11.0 (Ocata) | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-heat-templates-0:6.2.12-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 11.0 (Ocata) | RedHat | puppet-tripleo-0:6.5.10-3.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | instack-undercloud-0:7.4.12-1.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-common-0:7.6.13-3.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-heat-templates-0:7.0.12-8.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-image-elements-0:7.0.5-1.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-puppet-elements-0:7.0.7-1.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | os-net-config-0:7.3.6-1.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-aodh-0:11.4.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-ceilometer-0:11.5.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-ceph-0:2.4.2-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-cinder-0:11.5.0-4.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-glance-0:11.5.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-heat-0:11.5.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-ironic-0:11.5.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-keystone-0:11.4.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-manila-0:11.4.0-4.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-mistral-0:11.4.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-neutron-0:11.5.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-nova-0:11.5.0-4.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-panko-0:11.5.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-tripleo-0:7.4.12-8.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | puppet-trove-0:11.4.0-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | python-novajoin-0:1.0.17-3.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | python-os-brick-0:1.15.5-2.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 12.0 (Pike) | RedHat | python-tripleoclient-0:7.3.10-3.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 8.0 (Liberty) director | RedHat | instack-undercloud-0:2.2.7-13.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 8.0 (Liberty) director | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-heat-templates-0:0.8.14-42.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 9.0 (Mitaka) director | RedHat | instack-undercloud-0:4.0.0-18.el7ost | * |
| Red Hat OpenStack Platform 9.0 (Mitaka) director | RedHat | openstack-tripleo-heat-templates-0:2.0.0-65.el7ost | * |
| Memcached | Ubuntu | artful | * |
| Memcached | Ubuntu | esm-infra/xenial | * |
| Memcached | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Memcached | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Memcached | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
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.