CVE-2025-15156VulnerabilityPublished 28 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-15156: omec-project UPF · NULL Pointer Dereference

Affects omec-project UPFSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 28 Dec 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubomec-project/upf`pkg:github/omec-project/upf`Other threats	Affected =2.1.3-dev	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Until an official patch is released, European telecom operators should implement strict network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of the PFCP interface to trusted management and control plane entities only. Deploy network-level intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to monitor and block malformed or suspicious PFCP session establishment requests. Employ rate limiting and anomaly detection on PFCP traffic to reduce the risk of DoS exploitation. Regularly audit UPF logs for crash events or unusual session establishment failures indicative of exploitation attempts. Consider deploying redundant UPF instances with failover capabilities to minimize service impact in case of crashes. Engage with the omec-project community to track patch developments and apply updates promptly once available. Additionally, evaluate alternative UPF implementations with active maintenance if risk tolerance is low. Document incident response procedures specific to UPF service disruptions to enable rapid recovery.

Description

A flaw has been found in omec-project UPF up to 2.1.3-dev. This affects the function handleSessionEstablishmentRequest of the file /pfcpiface/pfcpiface/messages_session.go of the component PFCP Session Establishment Request Handler. This manipulation causes null pointer dereference. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Impact

For European organizations, particularly telecom operators and 5G infrastructure providers deploying omec-project UPF version 2.1.3-dev, this vulnerability poses a risk of service disruption through denial of service attacks. The UPF is a critical component in 5G networks responsible for user plane data forwarding; its failure can lead to dropped connections, degraded network performance, and potential cascading effects on dependent services. This can impact mobile broadband users, IoT services, and enterprise connectivity relying on 5G. Given the remote and unauthenticated exploitability, attackers could target vulnerable UPF instances to cause outages or degrade service quality. This is especially concerning for countries with advanced 5G rollouts and operators using open-source or omec-project-based UPF implementations. The lack of a patch and vendor response increases exposure time, necessitating immediate mitigations to maintain network stability and service continuity.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 30 Dec 2025, 23:38 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats