Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2005-3272
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedLinux kernel before 2.6.12 allows remote attackers to poison the bridge forwarding table using frames that have already been dropped by filtering, which can cause the bridge to forward spoofed packets.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe Linux kernel bridge implementation learns MAC addresses from incoming frames even when those frames are subsequently dropped by filtering rules (e.g., ebtables). An attacker can exploit this by sending frames with spoofed source MAC addresses that get filtered, causing the bridge's forwarding table to be poisoned with incorrect MAC-to-port mappings. This allows the attacker to redirect subsequent traffic destined for the spoofed MAC to an unintended port.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Linux KernelOperating system
= 2.6.0= 2.6.1= 2.6.2= 2.6.3= 2.6.4= 2.6.5= 2.6.6= 2.6.7= 2.6.8= 2.6.8.1= 2.6.9= 2.6.10CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the running kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version' to get the kernel versionAffected if The version is 2.6.0 through 2.6.10 inclusive (including 2.6.8.1 and 2.6.9)
-
Determine if the bridge module is loadedRun 'lsmod | grep bridge' or check /sys/module/bridge/version to see if the bridge module is presentAffected if The bridge module is loaded or a bridge interface exists
-
List active bridge interfacesRun 'brctl show' or 'ip link show type bridge' to enumerate bridge network devicesAffected if Any bridge interface is configured and active
-
Verify if packet filtering rules are in useRun 'ebtables -L' or 'iptables -L -v -n' to list filtering rules on the bridgeAffected if ebtables or iptables rules are configured that could filter frames on the bridge
A system is affected if it runs a kernel between 2.6.0 and 2.6.10, has bridge networking enabled, and uses ebtables or iptables filtering rules on the bridge
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to Linux kernel 2.6.12 or later where this issue is fixed. If upgrading is not feasible, disable bridging or implement strict network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted network segments.
Fix this in Linux Kernel
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-3272 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2005-3272 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data