CVE-2025-59150VulnerabilityPublished 1 Oct 2025Updated 23 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-59150: OISF suricata · NULL Pointer Dereference

Affects OISF suricataSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High · fixed in 8.0.1 : patch OISF suricata soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 8.0.1

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 1 Oct 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 26 Oct 2026.

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

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade Suricata to version 8.0.1 or later immediately to apply the official fix for the NULL pointer dereference vulnerability. 2. Until patching is feasible, disable all Suricata rules that utilize the tls.subjectaltname keyword to prevent triggering the segmentation fault. 3. Monitor Suricata logs and system stability closely for unexpected crashes or restarts that may indicate exploitation attempts. 4. Implement network-level filtering to detect and block suspicious TLS traffic containing malformed or unusual subject alternative names, if possible. 5. Employ redundancy in network monitoring by deploying multiple IDS/IPS sensors or fallback systems to maintain visibility during potential Suricata outages. 6. Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing focused on TLS traffic handling to identify similar weaknesses. 7. Educate security operations teams about this vulnerability and the importance of timely patching and rule management to maintain continuous network defense.

Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Version 8.0.0's usage of the tls.subjectaltname keyword can lead to a segmentation fault when the decoded subjectaltname contains a NULL byte. This issue is fixed in version 8.0.1. To workaround this issue, disable rules using the tls.subjectaltname keyword.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-59150 is denial of service caused by Suricata process crashes, which can disable or degrade network intrusion detection and prevention capabilities. For European organizations, this can lead to blind spots in network security monitoring, increasing the risk of undetected cyberattacks, data breaches, or lateral movement by threat actors. Critical infrastructure sectors such as energy, finance, telecommunications, and government agencies that depend on Suricata for network defense may experience operational disruptions and increased exposure to threats. The vulnerability's ease of exploitation and remote triggerability make it a viable attack vector for adversaries aiming to disrupt security operations. Although no confidentiality or integrity impact is directly associated, the loss of availability of Suricata monitoring can indirectly facilitate more severe attacks. Organizations with high network traffic volumes and complex TLS environments may be more susceptible to frequent crashes, exacerbating the operational impact.

CWE-476NULL Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #13OWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.
Implementation
For any pointers that could have been modified or provided from a function that can return NULL, check the pointer for NULL before use. When working with a multithreaded or otherwise asynchronous environment, ensure that proper locking APIs are used to lock before the check, and unlock when it has finished.
Requirements
Select a programming language that is not susceptible to these issues.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is non-null before acting upon it.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 23 Oct 2025, 13:52 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-476

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats