CVE-2018-1125

Exp

procps-ng before version 3.3.15 is vulnerable to a stack buffer overflow in pgrep. This vulnerability is mitigated by FORTIFY, as it involves strncat() to a stack-allocated string. When pgrep is compiled with FORTIFY (as on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Fedora), the impact is limited to a crash.

Published: 2018-05-23 Last update: 2025-12-17 Assigner: [email protected] Source: [email protected]
NVD Status：Modified，CVE State: published
View at NVD, CVE.org, EUVD

CVE-2018-1125 is rated High Exploit Risk (74.9/100): CVSS High severity, with medium exploitation likelihood (EPSS 2.20%). 1 public exploit reference(s) are indexed (Exploit-DB). EPSS rose +1.84% over the last day, indicating growing attacker interest. Public exploits are available—assess exposure, apply mitigations, and prioritize patching.

Risk is dynamic; we continuously reassess and refresh what is shown on this page as upstream context changes.

Public exploit references (Exploit-DB) for CVE-2018-1125

EDB-ID Source Kind Published Link
— nvd_ref exploit_tag Exploit-DB ↗

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2018-1125

EPSS lead: Daily EPSS estimates relative likelihood of exploitation; percentile ranks this CVE among scored vulnerabilities (higher = more severe relative rank).

# Date Old EPSS score New EPSS score Delta (New - Old)
1 2026-06-15 0.36% 2.20% +1.84%
2 2025-11-21 0.33% 0.36% +0.03%
3 2025-11-18 — 0.33% —

Full EPSS history (14 records total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2018-1125

CVSS metrics for this CVE.

Base score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Impact Score source
7.5 3.1 HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:N)
Could be attacked over the internet or any normal routed network—not just someone sitting at the machine.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:N)
No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
 3.9 3.6 [email protected]
7.5 3.1 HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:N)
Could be attacked over the internet or any normal routed network—not just someone sitting at the machine.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:N)
No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
 3.9 3.6 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
4.4 3.0 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:L)
Attackers could change some data, but it’s limited—not everything goes.
Availability (A:L)
Might cause slowdowns, glitches, or partial disruption—not a full brick.
 1.8 2.5 [email protected]
5.0 2.0 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P Click to expand
Access vector (AV:N)
Can be exploited remotely over network reachability.
Access complexity (AC:L)
Exploitation conditions are straightforward and predictable.
Authentication (AU:N)
No authentication is required.
Confidentiality impact (C:N)
No confidentiality impact.
Integrity impact (I:N)
No integrity impact.
Availability impact (A:P)
Partial availability impact.
 10.0 2.9 [email protected]

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2018-1125

OS Trackers for CVE-2018-1125

vendor priority summary link
debian not yet assigned CVE-2018-1125 not yet assigned priority: Debian including 1 source packages (procps), 5 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 5. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-1125
redhat low — https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2018-1125
suse medium CVE-2018-1125 severity moderate: SUSE including 493 source package names (0.1.0:libprocps7-3.3.15-7.7.26, 0.1.0:procps-3.3.15-7.7.26, …), 958 product×package rows across 485 product lines (Container bci/bci-init, Container bci/gcc, … (485 product lines)): Fixed 801, Known Affected 157. https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2018-1125/
ubuntu medium CVE-2018-1125 medium priority: Ubuntu including 1 source packages (procps), 5 status rows across 5 suites (artful, bionic, trusty, upstream, xenial): released 5. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2018-1125

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2018-1125

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
procps-ng_project procps-ng < 3.3.15 cpe:2.3:a:procps-ng_project:procps-ng:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
canonical ubuntu_linux 12.04 cpe:2.3:o:canonical:ubuntu_linux:12.04:*:*:*:esm:*:*:*
canonical ubuntu_linux 14.04 cpe:2.3:o:canonical:ubuntu_linux:14.04:*:*:*:lts:*:*:*
canonical ubuntu_linux 16.04 cpe:2.3:o:canonical:ubuntu_linux:16.04:*:*:*:lts:*:*:*
canonical ubuntu_linux 17.10 cpe:2.3:o:canonical:ubuntu_linux:17.10:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
canonical ubuntu_linux 18.04 cpe:2.3:o:canonical:ubuntu_linux:18.04:*:*:*:lts:*:*:*
debian debian_linux 7.0 cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux:7.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
debian debian_linux 8.0 cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux:8.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
debian debian_linux 9.0 cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux:9.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
opensuse leap 15.1 cpe:2.3:o:opensuse:leap:15.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2018-1125

URL Tags
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00058.html Mailing List Third Party Advisory
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00059.html Mailing List Third Party Advisory
http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2018/q2/122 Mailing List Third Party Advisory
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/104214 Third Party Advisory VDB Entry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2018-1125 Issue Tracking
https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/05/msg00021.html Mailing List Third Party Advisory
https://usn.ubuntu.com/3658-1/ Third Party Advisory
https://usn.ubuntu.com/3658-3/ Third Party Advisory
https://www.debian.org/security/2018/dsa-4208 Third Party Advisory
https://www.qualys.com/2018/05/17/procps-ng-audit-report-advisory.txt Exploit Third Party Advisory
cvelogic Threat Intelligence