CVE-2025-64332VulnerabilityPublished 26 Nov 2025Updated 28 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64332: OISF suricata · Stack-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 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 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 2026-10-26.

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

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 installations to version 7.0.13, 8.0.2, or later where the vulnerability is patched. 2. If immediate upgrading is not feasible, disable SWF decompression by ensuring the 'swf-decompression' setting in suricata.yaml is set to false (default). 3. If SWF decompression must remain enabled, configure the 'decompress-depth' parameter to a value less than half the stack size to limit the risk of overflow. 4. Monitor Suricata logs and system stability for unexpected crashes or restarts that may indicate exploitation attempts. 5. Employ network traffic filtering to limit exposure to SWF content from untrusted sources, reducing the attack surface. 6. Incorporate Suricata version checks and configuration audits into regular security assessments and patch management processes. 7. Coordinate with managed security service providers to confirm their Suricata deployments are patched or mitigated accordingly. 8. Consider deploying additional IDS/IPS solutions or failover mechanisms to maintain network monitoring availability during patching or mitigation activities.

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 stack overflow that causes Suricata to crash can occur if SWF decompression is enabled. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling SWF decompression (swf-decompression in suricata.yaml), it is disabled by default; set decompress-depth to lower than half your stack size if swf-decompression must be enabled.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-64332 is the potential denial-of-service of Suricata-based network security monitoring and intrusion detection systems. This disruption can degrade an organization's ability to detect and respond to network threats, increasing exposure to other attacks. Critical infrastructure sectors, financial institutions, telecommunications providers, and large enterprises that rely heavily on Suricata for real-time network security monitoring are at heightened risk. The lack of confidentiality or integrity impact means data breaches are unlikely directly from this vulnerability, but the availability impact can indirectly facilitate more severe attacks by blinding defenders. Given Suricata's widespread use in open-source and commercial security solutions across Europe, unpatched systems could experience service outages or forced downtime. This may also affect managed security service providers (MSSPs) using Suricata to monitor client networks, potentially impacting multiple organizations. The ease of remote exploitation without authentication increases the urgency for timely patching and mitigation.

CWE-121Stack-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #14
A stack-based buffer overflow condition is a condition where the buffer being overwritten is allocated on the stack (i.e., is a local variable or, rarely, a parameter to a function).
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…
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Implementation
Implement and perform bounds checking on input.
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)
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, 23:48 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-121

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats