CVE-2025-64330VulnerabilityPublished 26 Nov 2025Updated 28 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64330: OISF suricata · Heap-based Buffer Overflow

Affects OISF suricataSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 8.0.2 or 7.0.13 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 30% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 8.0.2, 7.0.13

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 26 Nov 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 2026-10-25.

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

Upgrade oisf/suricata to 8.0.2 or 7.0.13.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHuboisf/suricata`pkg:github/oisf/suricata`Other threats	Affected <7.0.13 <8.0.2	Fixed in 7.0.13 8.0.2

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

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade Suricata to version 7.0.13 or 8.0.2 or later immediately to apply the official patch addressing the heap overflow. 2. Increase the packet-alert-max parameter in the suricata.yaml configuration to enlarge the per-packet alert queue size, reducing the chance of triggering the overflow condition. 3. Review and optimize Suricata rule sets to minimize unnecessary alerts that could fill the alert queue rapidly. 4. Implement network segmentation and filtering to limit exposure of Suricata sensors to untrusted or high-risk traffic sources. 5. Monitor Suricata logs and system stability closely for signs of crashes or abnormal behavior indicative of attempted exploitation. 6. Employ redundancy in network monitoring infrastructure to maintain coverage if one sensor is impacted. 7. Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration tests focusing on IDS/IPS components. 8. Stay informed on OISF advisories and community updates for any emerging exploit reports or additional mitigations. These steps go beyond generic patching by addressing configuration tuning and operational resilience specific to this vulnerability.

Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, a single byte read heap overflow when logging the verdict in eve.alert and eve.drop records can lead to crashes. This requires the per packet alert queue to be filled with alerts and then followed by a pass rule. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. To reduce the likelihood of this issue occurring, the alert queue size a should be increased (packet-alert-max in suricata.yaml) if verdict is enabled.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to network security infrastructure availability. Suricata is widely used in enterprise, government, and critical infrastructure sectors across Europe for intrusion detection and prevention. A successful exploit could cause Suricata to crash, resulting in loss of network monitoring and potential blind spots to malicious activity, increasing the risk of undetected attacks. This is particularly critical for sectors such as finance, energy, telecommunications, and public administration, where continuous network monitoring is essential for operational security and regulatory compliance. The denial of service could also disrupt incident response capabilities and delay threat detection. While the vulnerability does not compromise data confidentiality or integrity directly, the availability impact can indirectly increase exposure to other threats. Organizations with high network traffic and complex rule sets are more susceptible due to the alert queue conditions required to trigger the overflow. The lack of known exploits in the wild provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the ease of exploitation and network attack vector necessitate urgent patching and configuration adjustments.

CWE-122Heap-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #16
A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().
Pre-design: Use a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Forced Integer Overflow (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Dec 2025, 23:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-122

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats