VulnerabilityPublished 10 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-45762: OISF suricata · Type Confusion

Affects OISF suricataSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 8.0.5 or 7.0.16 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 8.0.5, 7.0.16

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 10 Sep 2026
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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 suricata and oisf/suricata to 8.0.5 or 7.0.16.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
OISFsuricata	Affected >=8.0.0 <8.0.5	Fixed in 8.0.5
OISFsuricata	Affected <7.0.16	Fixed in 7.0.16
GitHuboisf/suricata`pkg:github/oisf/suricata`Other threats	Affected >=8.0.0 <8.0.5 <7.0.16	Fixed in 8.0.5 7.0.16

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

AI-suggested

This vulnerability is fixed in Suricata versions 7.0.16 and 8.0.5. Users should upgrade to one of these versions or later. As a temporary workaround, if Suricata is deployed as an IDS using AF_PACKET, enabling the AF_PACKET defrag option may prevent Suricata from receiving the crafted fragmented packets that trigger the crash.

Description

CVE-2026-45762 is a high-severity vulnerability in Suricata, a network intrusion detection and prevention system. The flaw involves a type confusion in the IP defragmentation tracker lookup, where fragmented IPv6 packets could be incorrectly associated with IPv4 trackers. This mismatch can cause Suricata to crash and result in a denial of service. The issue affects Suricata versions prior to 7.0.16 and versions from 8.0.0 up to but not including 8.0.5. Fixed versions 7.0.16 and 8.0.5 address this vulnerability. A workaround for IDS deployments using AF_PACKET is to enable the AF_PACKET defrag option to prevent Suricata from processing problematic fragmented packets.

Impact

An attacker can send crafted fragmented IPv6/IPv4 packets that cause Suricata to crash remotely, leading to denial of service. There is no impact on confidentiality or integrity reported. The vulnerability affects network availability by causing Suricata to stop processing traffic.

Summary

Suricata's IP defragmentation tracker did not verify that the IP address family of an existing tracker matched the packet being processed. This allowed crafted fragmented IPv6 traffic to be associated with an IPv4 defragmentation tracker, causing type confusion (CWE-843). The resulting condition can trigger a remote crash and denial of service when Suricata attempts to defragment the packets. The vulnerability is fixed in Suricata versions 7.0.16 and 8.0.5. A temporary mitigation is available by enabling AF_PACKET's defrag option when Suricata is used as an IDS with AF_PACKET.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 18 Sep 2026, 00:37 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-843

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats