dbcve.org
EsxApplication · VMware

CVE-2010-3609

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2011-03-11
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The extension parser in slp_v2message.c in OpenSLP 1.2.1, and other versions before SVN revision 1647, as used in Service Location Protocol daemon (SLPD) in VMware ESX 4.0 and 4.1 and ESXi 4.0 and 4.1, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) via a packet with a "next extension offset" that references this extension or a previous extension. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.

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 confidence

The extension parser in slp_v2message.c in OpenSLP does not properly validate the 'next extension offset' field in SLP packets. A malicious packet can set the offset to reference the current extension or a previous extension, causing the parser to enter an infinite loop and consume 100% CPU, resulting in denial of service.

MitigationUpdate OpenSLP to SVN revision 1647 or later, or apply VMware-provided patches for affected ESX/ESXi versions. Network filtering of SLP traffic (port 427) can provide interim protection.

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
EsxApplication
Affected:= 4.0= 4.1
EsxiApplication
Affected:= 4.0= 4.1
OpenslpApplication
Affected:= 1.2.1

CVSS 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
Partial

AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check if OpenSLP software is installed
    On Linux/Unix: rpm -qa | grep -i slp or dpkg -l | grep -i slp. On VMware ESX/ESXi: vmware -v or localcli system version get
    Affected if OpenSLP package is not found or version cannot be determined, the system is likely not affected by this specific OpenSLP vulnerability
  2. Determine OpenSLP version
    Run 'slpd -V' or 'slpinfo -v' if available. For VMware, check /usr/lib/vmware/openslp/ or similar paths for version files
    Affected if Version is 1.2.1 exactly, or if running VMware ESX/ESXi 4.0 or 4.1, the environment is in the affected version range
  3. Verify SLP service is running
    Run 'ps aux | grep slpd' or check service status: service slpd status (Linux) or /etc/init.d/slpd status
    Affected if The slpd process is running and listening, the vulnerable code path is active and could be exploited
  4. Check if port 427 is open and listening
    Run 'netstat -anp | grep 427' or 'ss -anp | grep 427' to verify SLP daemon is accepting connections
    Affected if Port 427 is open and bound to SLP service, the attack surface is exposed to network-based exploitation
  5. Inspect SLP configuration for open access
    Check /etc/slp.conf or /etc/slp.reg for 'net.slp.enable' and 'net.slp.isBroadcastOnly' settings
    Affected if SLP is enabled and configured without restrictively limiting access, remote attackers can send malicious packets

A system is affected if it runs OpenSLP 1.2.1 or VMware ESX/ESXi 4.0/4.1 with the SLP service (slpd) running and port 427 accessible, allowing a malicious SLP packet to trigger the infinite loop in the extension parser.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Update OpenSLP to SVN revision 1647 or later, or apply VMware-provided patches for affected ESX/ESXi versions. Network filtering of SLP traffic (port 427) can provide interim protection.

Fix this in Esx Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,160.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-3609 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2010-3609 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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