CVE-2011-0413
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 DHCPv6 server in ISC DHCP 4.0.x and 4.1.x before 4.1.2-P1, 4.0-ESV and 4.1-ESV before 4.1-ESV-R1, and 4.2.x before 4.2.1b1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon crash) by sending a message over IPv6 for a declined and abandoned address.
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 ISC DHCPv6 server versions 4.0.x, 4.1.x before 4.1.2-P1, 4.0-ESV and 4.1-ESV before 4.1-ESV-R1, and 4.2.x before 4.2.1b1 contain an assertion failure vulnerability when processing DHCPv6 messages for declined and abandoned IPv6 addresses. Remote attackers can send specially crafted IPv6 messages causing the daemon to crash via assertion failure, resulting in denial of service.
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= 4.0= 4.0.0= 4.0.1= 4.0.2= 4.0.3= 4.1.0= 4.1.1= 4.1.2= 4.0-esv= 4.1-esv= 4.2.0CVSS 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.
-
Identify ISC DHCP server installation and versionRun 'dhcpd -v' or 'dhcpd6 -v' to display the DHCP daemon version. On Linux, also check '/usr/sbin/dhcpd' version via 'dhcpd --version'. Package managers can be used: 'rpm -q dhcp' (RHEL/CentOS), 'dpkg -l isc-dhcp-server' (Debian/Ubuntu), or 'yum list dhcp' (Fedora).Affected if The installed version is 4.0.x, 4.1.x before 4.1.2-P1, 4.0-ESV, 4.1-ESV before 4.1-ESV-R1, or 4.2.x before 4.2.1b1. Specifically, versions 4.0, 4.0.0, 4.0.1, 4.0.2, 4.0.3, 4.1.0, 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.0-esv, 4.1-esv, or 4.2.0 are affected.
-
Confirm DHCPv6 server process is runningCheck for running dhcpd process with IPv6 capability. Run 'ps aux | grep dhcpd' and look for dhcpd process. Use 'netstat -uanp | grep 547' or 'ss -uanp | grep 547' to check if the DHCPv6 service is listening on UDP port 547 (DHCPv6 server port).Affected if The DHCPv6 server daemon (dhcpd) is actively running and listening on IPv6.
-
Verify IPv6 network binding configurationInspect the DHCP server configuration file typically located at '/etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf' or '/etc/dhcpd.conf'. Look for 'dhcpd6.conf' if separate IPv6 configuration exists. Check for 'authoritative;' directive and any 'interface' or 'bind-interface' statements indicating IPv6 binding.Affected if The DHCP server is configured to bind to IPv6 interfaces or the configuration file explicitly enables DHCPv6 service.
-
Check IPv6 network exposureReview firewall rules and network access controls. Run 'iptables -L -n' for IPv4 and 'ip6tables -L -n' for IPv6 to determine if the DHCPv6 port 547/UDP is accessible. Verify if the server has a public or otherwise accessible IPv6 address.Affected if The DHCPv6 server (port 547/UDP) is reachable from untrusted IPv6 networks, increasing exposure to remote attack.
A user is affected if they are running a vulnerable ISC DHCP version (4.0.x, 4.1.x before 4.1.2-P1, 4.0-ESV/4.1-ESV before patches, or 4.2.x before 4.2.1b1) with the DHCPv6 server enabled and accessible over IPv6 networks.
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 dataUpdate ISC DHCP to version 4.1.2-P1, 4.1-ESV-R1, 4.2.1b1 or later to patch the assertion vulnerability. If immediate patching is not possible, restrict IPv6 network access to the DHCPv6 server to limit exposure.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,936.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-0413 — 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 sources- www.isc.org
- kb.isc.org
- lists.fedoraproject.org
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- securitytracker.com
- www.debian.org
- www.kb.cert.org
- www.mandriva.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.vupen.com
- www.osvdb.org
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2011-0413 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