CVE Intelligence
Medium Denial of service exploit reference

CVE-2025-59529 — simple protocol server ignores accepts unlimited connections and logs failures without limit

Avahi is a system which facilitates service discovery on a local network via the mDNS/DNS-SD protocol suite. In versions up to and including 0.9-rc2, the simple protocol server ignores the documented client limit and accepts unlimited connections, allowing for easy local DoS. Although `CLIENTS_MAX` is defined, `server_work()` unconditionally `accept()`s and `client_new()` always appends the new client and increments `n_clients`. There is no check against the limit. When client cannot be accepted as a result of maximal socket number of avahi-daemon, it logs unconditionally error per each connection. Unprivileged local users can exhaust daemon memory and file descriptors, causing a denial of service system-wide for mDNS/DNS-SD. Exhausting local file descriptors causes increased system load caused by logging errors of each of request. Overloading prevents glibc calls using nss-mdns plugins to resolve `*.local.` names and link-local addresses. As of time of publication, no known patched versions are available, but a candidate fix is available in pull request 808, and some workarounds are available. Simple clients are offered for nss-mdns package functionality. It is not possible to disable the unix socket `/run/avahi-daemon/socket`, but resolution requests received via DBus are not affected directly. Tools avahi-resolve, avahi-resolve-address and avahi-resolve-host-name are not affected, they use DBus interface. It is possible to change permissions of unix socket after avahi-daemon is started. But avahi-daemon does not provide any configuration for it. Additional access restrictions like SELinux can also prevent unwanted tools to access the socket and keep resolution working for trusted users.

Published Dec 18, 2025 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
  • Technical severity (medium)+3
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.18%
ahead of 7% of scored CVEs · Oct 16, 2026
Affects
Avahi
Avahi
CVSS base
5.5
Medium · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Avahi Avahi).
  2. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (denial of service), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Avahi Avahi < 0.9version 0.9-rc1 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Avahi Avahi version <= 0.9-rc2 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
5.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 1.8 3.6 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-400 · Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 16, 2026 · 4 reading(s) · max 0.18%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
  • Track CPU/memory spikes and availability drops correlated with request patterns.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)resource metrics

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · avahi/avahi
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 5.5
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • 2025
  • CVE published
    Dec 18, 2025 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Avahi
every CVE for this vendor
Denial of service
same class
CWE-400
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-34933 Avahi: Reachable assertion in `transport_flags_from_domain()` via conflicting publish flags crashes avahi-daemon Apr 3, 2026
  • CVE-2026-24401 Avahi has Uncontrolled Recursion in lookup_handle_cname function Jan 23, 2026
  • CVE-2025-68468 Avahi has a reachable assertion in lookup_multicast_callback Jan 12, 2026
  • CVE-2025-68471 Avahi has a reachable assertion in lookup_start Jan 12, 2026
  • CVE-2025-68276 Avahi has a reachable assertion in avahi_wide_area_scan_cache Jan 12, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-59529 is "simple protocol server ignores accepts unlimited connections and logs failures without limit", rated Medium. It affects Avahi (Avahi); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.18% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.