CVE-2016-10142

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.

公開: 2017-01-14 最後更新: 2026-06-16 指派方: [email protected] 來源: [email protected]

結論預警: CVE-2016-10142 綜合評估為高風險(65.5/100):CVSS 技術影響為高級,利用機率(EPSS 2.73%) 核心證據: 近一日 EPSS 上升 +1.63%,被利用關注度持續升高。 強制指令: 被利用機率偏高—請盤點暴露面並優先安排修補。

風險隨態勢動態變化;本站持續評估並同步更新本頁展示內容。

CVE-2016-10142 的 EPSS(利用預測評分)

EPSS 日更估計相對被利用可能性;百分位表示該 CVE 在已評分漏洞中的相對排名(越高表示相對更嚴重)。

# 日期 舊 EPSS 分數 新 EPSS 分數 變化(新 − 舊)
1 2026-06-15 1.10% 2.73% +1.63%
2 2026-03-30 0.66% 1.10% +0.44%
3 2025-03-30 0.66%

完整 EPSS 歷史 (共 7 筆)

CVE-2016-10142 的 CVSS 指標

該 CVE 的 CVSS 指標。

底座分 版本 嚴重度 向量 可利用性 影響 分數來源
8.6 3.0 HIGH
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H 點擊展開
攻擊向量 (AV:N)
可經網際網路或企業內可路由網段從遠端觸達,攻擊者不必在裝置旁邊。
攻擊複雜度 (AC:L)
前置條件清楚,成功路徑穩定,不必仰賴罕見競態或極端環境。
權限需求 (PR:N)
不必事先登入或提權,匿名工作階段也可能成為跳板。
使用者互動 (UI:N)
不必受害者點連結、放行巨集或安裝軟體,攻擊鏈可自動走完。
作用域 (S:C)
可從脆弱點橫向波及其他元件或更高權限域,爆炸半徑更大。
機密性影響 (C:N)
幾乎談不上實質的敏感資料外洩。
完整性影響 (I:N)
對紀錄真實性與不可否認性的破壞可忽略。
可用性影響 (A:H)
可造成長時間中斷、關鍵交易無法完成,或伴隨資料毀損導致難以自癒。
3.9 4.0 [email protected]
5.0 2.0 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P 點擊展開
存取路徑 (AV:N)
只要路由可達,即可從遠端發動利用。
存取複雜度 (AC:L)
步驟短、路徑清楚,重現成本低。
認證 (AU:N)
全程無需有效身分。
機密性影響 (C:N)
對機密性無影響。
完整性影響 (I:N)
對完整性無影響。
可用性影響 (A:P)
可用性受到部分損害。
10.0 2.9 [email protected]

CVE-2016-10142 的弱點列舉

CVE-2016-10142 的 OS 追蹤

vendor priority summary link
redhat medium https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-10142
suse low https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-10142/
ubuntu medium CVE-2016-10142 medium priority: Ubuntu including 99 source packages (linux, linux-armadaxp, …), 805 status rows across 12 suites (artful, bionic, focal, jammy, noble, plucky, precise, trusty, upstream, xenial, yakkety, zesty): DNE 535, not-affected 137, released 104, ignored 29. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2016-10142

CVE-2016-10142 的影響軟體 / 設定

廠商 產品 版本 原始 CPE
ietf ipv6 cpe:2.3:a:ietf:ipv6:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

CVE-2016-10142 的參考連結

cvelogic Threat Intelligence