CVE-2018-0172
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 DHCP option 82 encapsulation functionality of Cisco IOS Software and Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause an affected device to reload, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The vulnerability exists because the affected software performs incomplete input validation of option 82 information that it receives in DHCP Version 4 (DHCPv4) packets from DHCP relay agents. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted DHCPv4 packet to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause a heap overflow condition on the affected device, which will cause the device to reload and result in a DoS condition. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg62730.
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 heap overflow vulnerability exists in Cisco IOS and IOS XE Software's DHCP option 82 encapsulation functionality due to incomplete input validation of option 82 information in DHCPv4 packets from relay agents. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a crafted DHCPv4 packet to trigger the heap overflow, causing the affected device to reload and result 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 dataall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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.
-
Confirm device runs Cisco IOS or IOS XEUse 'show version' command to identify the operating system. Look for 'Cisco IOS' or 'Cisco IOS XE' in the output.Affected if Device runs any version of Cisco IOS or IOS XE software (all versions are affected per the advisory).
-
Check if DHCP relay is enabledRun 'show ip interface' on relevant interfaces or use 'show running-config | include ip helper-address' to see if DHCP relay is configured.Affected if DHCP relay is configured via 'ip helper-address' command, indicating the device may process DHCP packets.
-
Verify DHCP option 82 insertion is configuredRun 'show running-config | include ip dhcp relay information option' or check DHCP relay configuration for 'ip dhcp relay information option' settings.Affected if DHCP option 82 insertion is explicitly enabled via 'ip dhcp relay information option' or 'ip dhcp relay information option enable' configuration.
-
Check for trusted/untrusted DHCP relay interfacesRun 'show ip interface' on upstream/downstream interfaces and check for 'ip dhcp relay information trusted' or 'ip dhcp relay information untrusted' settings.Affected if Interfaces are configured as trusted for DHCP relay with option 82, allowing option 82 data to be processed without validation.
A Cisco IOS or IOS XE device is affected if it has DHCP relay configured with option 82 insertion or trusted option 82 processing enabled, regardless of version.
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 for bug CSCvg62730 by upgrading to a fixed software version. As an interim measure, consider disabling DHCP relay or implementing ACLs to filter untrusted DHCP traffic at network boundaries.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0172 — 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-2018-0172 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