CVE-2017-6678
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in the ingress UDP packet processing functionality of Cisco Virtualized Packet Core-Distributed Instance (VPC-DI) Software 19.2 through 21.0 could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause both control function (CF) instances on an affected system to reload, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The vulnerability is due to insufficient handling of user-supplied data by the affected software. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted UDP packets to the distributed instance (DI) network addresses of both CF instances on an affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause an unhandled error condition on the affected system, which would cause the CF instances to reload and consequently cause the entire VPC to reload, resulting in the disconnection of all subscribers and a DoS condition on the affected system. This vulnerability can be exploited via IPv4 traffic only. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvc01665 CSCvc35565.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in Cisco VPC-DI Software versions 19.2-21.0 allows unauthenticated remote attackers to cause denial of service by sending crafted UDP packets to the distributed instance network addresses of both control function (CF) instances. The insufficient handling of user-supplied data in the ingress UDP packet processing triggers an unhandled error condition, causing both CF instances to reload and the entire VPC to fail.
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= v19.2_base= v19.3_base= v20.0_base= v20.1_base= v20.2_base= v21.0_baseCVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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 the installed VPC-DI software versionAccess the VPC-DI CLI and run 'show version' or 'show software' to display the installed software versionAffected if The version displayed is any of: 19.2_base, 19.3_base, 20.0_base, 20.1_base, 20.2_base, or 21.0_base
-
Confirm the product is Cisco Virtualized Packet CoreRun 'show system' or 'show chassis' to verify the platform is VPC-DI (Virtualized Packet Core - Distributed Instance)Affected if The product is confirmed as Cisco VPC-DI and version falls within the affected range
-
Check for CF reload events or crash logsRun 'show logging' or 'show crash' commands to look for recent reload events or error messages related to CF (Control Function) instancesAffected if Recent reloads of both CF instances are observed without an apparent administrative cause
-
Verify DI network interface exposureRun 'show ip interface brief' to identify the distributed instance (DI) network interface IP addresses and check if UDP traffic on these interfaces is reachable from untrusted networksAffected if DI network interfaces are accessible from networks where unauthenticated attackers could send UDP packets
-
Review recent UDP packet processing errorsRun 'show logging' or 'show buffer' commands to search for UDP packet handling errors, unhandled exceptions, or packet processing failures in the logsAffected if Error messages indicate failures in UDP packet processing that correlate with CF reload events
If running any Cisco VPC-DI version from 19.2_base through 21.0_base with exposed DI network interfaces, the environment is likely affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataApply the Cisco patch (software version 21.1 or later per the 'through 21.0' affected range) to remediate the insufficient input validation in the UDP packet handler. Consider network segmentation to limit exposure of the DI network interfaces if immediate patching is not feasible.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6678 — 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-2017-6678 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