CVE-2025-8671VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2025Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-8671: SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Development Tools · Improper Resource Shutdown or Release

Affects SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Development ToolsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

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: 3.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 89% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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 13 Aug 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-8671, European organizations should take the following specific actions: 1) Monitor SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Development Tools version 15 SP2 deployments and identify all systems running this affected version. 2) Apply any patches or updates released by SUSE as soon as they become available; proactively engage with SUSE support channels to obtain early access or workarounds. 3) Implement network-level protections such as rate limiting and anomaly detection on HTTP/2 traffic to detect and block abnormal patterns of stream resets or malformed frames indicative of exploitation attempts. 4) Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) or Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) with signatures or heuristics tuned to detect excessive HTTP/2 stream resets. 5) Isolate critical development and production environments to limit exposure and reduce the attack surface. 6) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on HTTP/2 implementations to identify potential weaknesses. 7) Educate network and security operations teams about this vulnerability to ensure rapid detection and response to suspicious activity. 8) Consider temporarily disabling HTTP/2 support on vulnerable systems if immediate patching is not feasible and if business operations allow.

Description

A mismatch caused by client-triggered server-sent stream resets between HTTP/2 specifications and the internal architectures of some HTTP/2 implementations may result in excessive server resource consumption leading to denial-of-service (DoS). By opening streams and then rapidly triggering the server to reset them—using malformed frames or flow control errors—an attacker can exploit incorrect stream accounting. Streams reset by the server are considered closed at the protocol level, even though backend processing continues. This allows a client to cause the server to handle an unbounded number of concurrent streams on a single connection. This CVE will be updated as affected product details are released.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the availability of systems running the affected SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Development Tools, particularly version 15 SP2. Organizations relying on these modules for development environments, continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines, or HTTP/2-enabled services may experience service disruptions or outages if targeted. The denial-of-service condition can degrade operational continuity, impacting business-critical applications and potentially causing downtime. This is especially critical for sectors with stringent uptime requirements such as finance, healthcare, telecommunications, and government services. Additionally, the ease of exploitation—requiring no authentication or user interaction—means that attackers can launch DoS attacks remotely, increasing the threat landscape. While no known exploits are currently in the wild, the vulnerability’s public disclosure may prompt attackers to develop exploits, raising the urgency for mitigation. The impact on confidentiality and integrity is negligible, but the availability impact alone justifies immediate attention.

CWE-404Improper Resource Shutdown or Release (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product does not release or incorrectly releases a resource before it is made available for re-use.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation
It is good practice to be responsible for freeing all resources you allocate and to be consistent with how and where you free memory in a function. If you allocate memory that you intend to free upon completion of the function, you must be sure to free the memory at all exit points for that function including error…
Implementation
Memory should be allocated/freed using matching functions such as malloc/free, new/delete, and new[]/delete[].
Attack patterns
TCP Fragmentation (opens in a new tab)
UDP Fragmentation (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Fragmentation (opens in a new tab)
BlueSmacking (opens in a new tab)
Flooding (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 11 Nov 2025, 06:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-404

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats