CVE-2016-10142
Last modified
CVE-2016-10142 is a vulnerability of currently unknown severity. 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]. EPSS estimates a 2.73% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
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.
Metrics
Weakness Enumeration
Affected Software
| Vendor | Product | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| Ietf | Ipv6 | All versions |
References
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-atomfrag-generation-08Third Party Advisory
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8021Third Party Advisory
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-atomfrag-generation-08Third Party Advisory
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8021Third Party Advisory
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Modified
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2016-10142?
How severe is CVE-2016-10142?
How do I fix CVE-2016-10142?
How Strix Helps
- How Strix found a critical auth bypass in etcdStrix autonomously discovered a critical authentication bypass in etcd, later designated CVE-2026-33413.
- Autonomous PentestingAI agents that find and validate exploitable vulnerabilities like this one across your applications.
- PR ReviewsPentest every pull request so vulnerable code is caught before it ships to production.
- AI Penetration TestingHow AI-driven penetration testing continuously covers your attack surface.
Related CVEs from 2016
- CVE-2016-10137An issue was discovered on BLU R1 HD devices with Shanghai A…
- CVE-2016-10138An issue was discovered on BLU Advance 5.0 and BLU R1 HD dev…
- CVE-2016-10139An issue was discovered on BLU R1 HD devices with Shanghai A…
- CVE-2016-1014Untrusted search path vulnerability in Adobe Flash Player be…7.3
- CVE-2016-10140Information disclosure and authentication bypass vulnerabili…
- CVE-2016-10141An integer overflow vulnerability was observed in the regemi…9.8
- CVE-2016-10143A vulnerability in Tiki Wiki CMS 15.2 could allow a remote a…
- CVE-2016-10144coders/ipl.c in ImageMagick allows remote attackers to have …9.8
- CVE-2016-10145Off-by-one error in coders/wpg.c in ImageMagick allows remot…9.8
- CVE-2016-10146Multiple memory leaks in the caption and label handling code…7.5
- CVE-2016-10147crypto/mcryptd.c in the Linux kernel before 4.8.15 allows lo…
- CVE-2016-10148The wp_ajax_update_plugin function in wp-admin/includes/ajax…
Are you affected by CVE-2016-10142?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST
