CVE-2012-3571
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 · uneditedISC DHCP 4.1.2 through 4.2.4 and 4.1-ESV before 4.1-ESV-R6 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop and CPU consumption) via a malformed client identifier.
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 confidenceISC DHCP server versions 4.1.2 through 4.2.4 and 4.1-ESV before 4.1-ESV-R6 contain a flaw in client identifier processing where a malformed client identifier triggers an infinite loop, causing 100% CPU utilization and 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= 11.04= 11.10= 12.04= 6.0= 7.0= 4.1.2= 4.2.0= 4.2.1= 4.2.2= 4.2.3= 4.2.4= 4.1-esvCVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:A/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.
-
Verify ISC DHCP server is installedRun 'dpkg -l | grep isc-dhcp-server' on Debian/Ubuntu, or 'rpm -qa | grep dhcp' on RHEL-based systems, or 'which dhcpd' to locate the dhcpd binaryAffected if The package or binary is found on the system
-
Determine the installed DHCP server versionRun 'dhcpd --version' or 'dpkg -l isc-dhcp-server' to obtain the exact version numberAffected if The version falls within 4.1.2 through 4.2.4, or is 4.1-ESV (any patch level before R6)
-
Confirm the DHCP server service is runningRun 'systemctl status isc-dhcp-server' on systemd systems, or 'service isc-dhcp-server status' on SysV init systemsAffected if The service is active and listening for DHCP client requests
-
Verify DHCP configuration includes client identifier processingInspect /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf or /etc/dhcpd.conf for 'send dhcp-client-identifier' statements or client-id related optionsAffected if The server is configured to process client identifiers from DHCP requests
The system is affected if ISC DHCP server versions 4.1.2-4.2.4 or 4.1-ESV before R6 is installed, running, and configured to process client identifiers, allowing a malformed client identifier to trigger the infinite loop.
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 ISC DHCP 4.1-ESV-R6 or later, or 4.2.4 and later versions to resolve the vulnerability. Consider network segmentation to limit exposure until patching is possible.
- Consultation2.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3571 — 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-2012-3571 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