CVE-2008-4618
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 · uneditedThe Stream Control Transmission Protocol (sctp) implementation in the Linux kernel before 2.6.27 does not properly handle a protocol violation in which a parameter has an invalid length, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service (panic) via unspecified vectors, related to sctp_sf_violation_paramlen, sctp_sf_abort_violation, sctp_make_abort_violation, and incorrect data types in function calls.
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's SCTP implementation before 2.6.27 fails to properly validate parameter lengths in SCTP packets, triggering a kernel panic when processing malformed packets that violate the SCTP protocol specification. The vulnerability exists in functions sctp_sf_violation_paramlen, sctp_sf_abort_violation, and sctp_make_abort_violation due to incorrect data type handling.
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<= 2.6.26.5= 2.2.27= 2.4.36= 2.4.36.1= 2.4.36.2= 2.4.36.3= 2.4.36.4= 2.4.36.5= 2.4.36.6= 2.6= 2.6.18= 2.6.19.4CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
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.
-
Check kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version' to obtain the running kernel versionAffected if The kernel version is 2.6.26.5 or earlier, or matches any of the specific affected versions listed (2.4.36 through 2.4.36.6, 2.6, 2.6.18, 2.6.19.4)
-
Verify SCTP kernel module availabilityRun 'modprobe sctp' or check if SCTP is built into the kernel by looking for CONFIG_IP_SCTP in /boot/config-$(uname -r) or /proc/config.gzAffected if SCTP support is compiled as a module or built-in (vulnerable only if SCTP is actually available to the system)
-
Check if SCTP module is currently loadedRun 'lsmod | grep sctp' to see if the sctp module is currently loaded in memoryAffected if The sctp module is loaded and active, making the vulnerability exploitable when processing network traffic
-
Detect active SCTP listenersRun 'ss -s' or 'netstat -s | grep SCTP' to see if the system is listening for or has active SCTP connectionsAffected if The system is listening on SCTP ports or has active SCTP associations, meaning it can receive malicious packets
You are affected if you are running a kernel version in the affected list AND SCTP is enabled/loaded on your system, as the kernel panic only occurs when processing malformed SCTP packets.
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 the Linux kernel to version 2.6.27 or later, or apply the vendor-specific kernel patch addressing this SCTP parameter length validation flaw.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-4618 — 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-2008-4618 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