CVE-2015-0564
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 · uneditedBuffer underflow in the ssl_decrypt_record function in epan/dissectors/packet-ssl-utils.c in Wireshark 1.10.x before 1.10.12 and 1.12.x before 1.12.3 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted packet that is improperly handled during decryption of an SSL session.
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 confidenceA buffer underflow vulnerability exists in Wireshark's ssl_decrypt_record function within the packet-ssl-utils.c dissector. The flaw allows remote attackers to crash the application by sending a specially crafted SSL packet that triggers improper handling during decryption of an SSL session.
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= 1.10.0= 1.10.1= 1.10.2= 1.10.3= 1.10.4= 1.10.5= 1.10.6= 1.10.7= 1.10.8= 1.10.9= 1.10.10= 1.10.11= 7= 7.0= 8.0= 11.2= 13.1= 13.2CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Determine if Wireshark is installedRun 'wireshark --version' or check your package manager for the wireshark packageAffected if Wireshark is not installed or the command fails, this CVE does not apply
-
Identify the installed Wireshark versionExecute 'wireshark --version' and note the version number in the output (for example: 1.10.5)Affected if The version falls within 1.10.0 through 1.10.11 inclusive - this indicates the vulnerable version range
-
Verify SSL/TLS dissector is enabledOpen Wireshark, go to Analyze > Enabled Protocols, and check if SSL or TLS protocols are enabled; or check the 'ssl' dissector status in the profileAffected if SSL/TLS dissector is enabled and the Wireshark version is in the 1.10.0-1.10.11 range, the vulnerability is present
-
Confirm SSL traffic dissection is in useInspect a capture file or live capture to see if it contains SSL/TLS traffic (look for packets on port 443 or other SSL-based protocols)Affected if You are actively dissecting SSL/TLS traffic with a vulnerable Wireshark version
You are affected if Wireshark version 1.10.0 through 1.10.11 is installed AND SSL/TLS dissector is enabled while processing SSL/TLS traffic.
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 Wireshark to version 1.10.12 or later for the 1.10.x branch, or version 1.12.3 or later for the 1.12.x branch to patch this vulnerability.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-0564 — 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-2015-0564 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