CVE
FRRouting remote use-after-free in bgpd tunnel encapsulation
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/AU:N/R:A
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- Fixed in 10.4.4, 10.5.4
- Who is exposed
- Specific setups only
Do first: Upgrade to a fixed version: 10.4.4, 10.5.4.
- Last modified
- Whether it needs action now or is a reference record, by fixed rules, with why. Last checked is when cve.now last re-read it.What do these mean? →
- Reference
- Last checked
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 16/100 · provisional
- How many real-world setups can hit the bug, from the vendor's advisory and CISA data. It does not know your setup.What do these mean? →
- Specific setups only
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
FRRouting's bgpd daemon mishandles Tunnel Encapsulation attributes with mismatched lengths, leading to a use-after-free. A remote BGP neighbor that already has an established session can trigger it by sending crafted UPDATE messages. The attack can crash bgpd and drop all BGP sessions on the router, and because freed memory is reused, further memory corruption cannot be ruled out.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
Original description
In FRRouting, bgpd accepts a Tunnel Encapsulation attribute (type 23) whose outer TLV length does not match the length of the attribute: the mismatch is only logged and the attribute is processed anyway. A BGP neighbor can send UPDATE messages carrying such an attribute that put the reference count of the attribute's interned sub-TLV chain out of balance, so that the chain is freed while routes stored by bgpd (Adj-RIB-In entries and RIB paths) still point to it. When those routes are later replaced, withdrawn or cleared, for example when the session goes down, bgpd reads the freed memory, decrements a reference count inside it and frees it a second time. In the reporter's build without AddressSanitizer this ended in an assertion failure in bgpd's memory accounting, aborting bgpd and dropping all BGP sessions on the router, and the neighbor can repeat it each time bgpd restarts. Because freed heap memory is written to and freed again, consequences beyond a crash cannot be ruled out. An established BGP session is required. bgpd processes attribute 23 from every neighbor, including eBGP neighbors, unless it is explicitly discarded, although RFC 9012 requires it to be filtered on eBGP sessions by default. The issue was reproduced with "soft-reconfiguration inbound" configured for the neighbor, and the reporter observed that the crash does not occur on every attempt.
cve.now Index
- Exploitation?/40Unknown. No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
- Exposure8/25Specific setups only, reachable over the network
- Reach?/20Unknown. No tracked technology or package matched
- Severity7.7/10CVSS 7.7
- No patch0/5No signal
What would change the score
- Would score about 66 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 61 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
- Would score about 23 if CISA's SSVC rates it automatable
What to do
Upgrade to a fixed version: 10.4.4, 10.5.4.
Workaround: Configure neighbor path-attribute discard 23 (or treat-as-withdraw 23) for neighbors not expected to send the Tunnel Encapsulation attribute, including all eBGP neighbors.
Check your systems with an agent
Paste this into a coding or ops agent. It checks your systems read-only and reports a table per asset.
Check whether my systems are affected by CVE-2026-129456 (frr: bgpd use-after-free of Tunnel Encapsulation sub-TLVs after a malformed attribute length from a peer), using the cve.now data below.
Rules: work read-only. Do not run exploit code, proof-of-concept scripts or scanners that send attack payloads, and do not change any configuration, package, image or deployment. Report findings only.
What cve.now has for CVE-2026-129456 (entry last updated 2026-11-14):
Affected:
- frrouting frrouting: from 10.4.0, fixed in 10.4.4; from 10.5.0, fixed in 10.5.4
Fixed versions: 10.4.4, 10.5.4.
Setup: unknown whether the bug needs a non-default feature or setting. Check the advisory.
Attacker needs: network access, low-privilege login, no user action.
Workaround: Configure neighbor path-attribute discard 23 (or treat-as-withdraw 23) for neighbors not expected to send the Tunnel Encapsulation attribute, including all eBGP neighbors. (source: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-129456)
CISA KEV: CVE-2026-129456 is not listed as of cve.now's last read.
This KEV status is for CVE-2026-129456 only. If you also check another CVE, look up its own KEV status; never assume it from this one.
How to check:
- Installed software: check what is actually running, not what a repo declares. Read the version from each host, container image and Kubernetes node (the binary's version output, the OS package database, image layers), and check whether the conditions above hold there. Distribution packages may carry a backported fix under an older version number; confirm against the distribution's own advisory.
Verify against the linked advisories before concluding, and cite the date you read each one:
- https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/21176/changes/1238ac4a06e5c23595e8bf626856f297d0c302a2
- https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/commit/bebf95f02bc0dccc6a1841f0c8cbcba1f617d655
- https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/commit/abef07b500e19baa924d157ab03809b93730e619
- https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/issues/20874
- https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-129456
Do not conclude an asset is unaffected unless you checked it and the evidence covers both its version and the conditions above. If you could not check something, mark it unknown and say what is missing.
Report a table with one row per asset and these columns: Asset | Version or build | Status (affected, fixed, not applicable, unknown) | Compensating controls | Exposure (internet-facing, internal, none) | Evidence | Next action.
Entry: https://cve.now/CVE-2026-129456
For follow-up questions, use the cve.now MCP server at https://mcp.cve.now/mcp (no authentication), for example execute with name cve.get and arguments {"id": "CVE-2026-129456"}.Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
Affected versions
- frrouting frrouting
From 10.4.0 · fixed in 10.4.4; From 10.5.0 · fixed in 10.5.4
Evidence 6
CVE record · 2
Establishes: The identifier and description.
- Record
- Record
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-129456
Is CVE-2026-129456 being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data
Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-129456?
frrouting: from 10.4.0 before 10.4.4; from 10.5.0 before 10.5.4.Source: cve.now feed data
How do I fix CVE-2026-129456?
Upgrade to frr 10.4.4 or 10.5.4, whichever matches your release line. If you cannot upgrade yet, configure neighbor path-attribute discard 23 or treat-as-withdraw 23 for neighbors not expected to send the Tunnel Encapsulation attribute, including all eBGP neighbors.Source: cve.org