<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 21:31:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-10686 — Missing hop-limit decrement on IPv6 forwarding path allows unbounded packet looping (DoS) in Zephyr routers</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2026-10686</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; zephyrproject zephyr&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Zephyr&amp;#39;s IPv6 forwarding path re-sent routed unicast packets without ever decrementing the IPv6 hop limit. Both routing branches of ipv6_route_packet() (subsys/net/ip) were affected: the explicit-route path (net_route_packet()) and the on-link cross-interface path (net_route_packet_if()). Each set the packet forwarding flag and called net_send_data() with the hop limit untouched and no expiry check.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Per RFC 8200 the hop-limit decrement is the mechanism that bounds packet lifetime and terminates routing loops; without it, a device acting as an IPv6 router relays looping packets indefinitely. An on-path attacker who can induce or exploit a transient L3 loop turns it into a permanent forwarding storm, causing CPU/bandwidth resource exhaustion (availability DoS) on the forwarder and adjacent links; path-discovery and loop diagnostics that rely on hop-limit expiry are also defeated.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Affected configurations. In every affected release the forwarding path is reached via CONFIG_NET_ROUTE (enabled by default when CONFIG_NET_IPV6_NBR_CACHE is set), together with CONFIG_NET_ROUTING for cross-interface routing. Note that CONFIG_NET_IPV6_FORWARDING and CONFIG_NET_IPV4_FORWARDING — which appear in the fix and in this advisory&amp;#39;s evidence notes — were introduced after v4.4.0, when the routing options were split and renamed; they do not exist in any affected release. When auditing a v4.4.1-or-earlier configuration, look for CONFIG_NET_ROUTE and CONFIG_NET_ROUTING.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;IPv4 is not affected in a…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; zephyrproject zephyr&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Zephyr&amp;#39;s IPv6 forwarding path re-sent routed unicast packets without ever decrementing the IPv6 hop limit. Both routing branches of ipv6_route_packet() (subsys/net/ip) were affected: the explicit-route path (net_route_packet()) and the on-link cross-interface path (net_route_packet_if()). Each set the packet forwarding flag and called net_send_data() with the hop limit untouched and no expiry check.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Per RFC 8200 the hop-limit decrement is the mechanism that bounds packet lifetime and terminates routing loops; without it, a device acting as an IPv6 router relays looping packets indefinitely. An on-path attacker who can induce or exploit a transient L3 loop turns it into a permanent forwarding storm, causing CPU/bandwidth resource exhaustion (availability DoS) on the forwarder and adjacent links; path-discovery and loop diagnostics that rely on hop-limit expiry are also defeated.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Affected configurations. In every affected release the forwarding path is reached via CONFIG_NET_ROUTE (enabled by default when CONFIG_NET_IPV6_NBR_CACHE is set), together with CONFIG_NET_ROUTING for cross-interface routing. Note that CONFIG_NET_IPV6_FORWARDING and CONFIG_NET_IPV4_FORWARDING — which appear in the fix and in this advisory&amp;#39;s evidence notes — were introduced after v4.4.0, when the routing options were split and renamed; they do not exist in any affected release. When auditing a v4.4.1-or-earlier configuration, look for CONFIG_NET_ROUTE and CONFIG_NET_ROUTING.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;IPv4 is not affected in a…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2026-10686</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
