CVE-2018-0372
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 DHCPv6 feature of the Cisco Nexus 9000 Series Fabric Switches in Application-Centric Infrastructure (ACI) Mode could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause the device to run low on system memory, which could result in a Denial of Service (DoS) condition on an affected system. The vulnerability is due to improper memory management when DHCPv6 packets are received on an interface of the targeted device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a high number of malicious DHCPv6 packets to be processed by an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause the system to run low on memory, which could cause an eventual reboot of an affected device. The vulnerability only applies to IPv6 protocol packets and not for IPv4 protocol packets. This vulnerability affects Cisco Nexus 9000 Series Fabric Switches in ACI Mode running software version 13.0(1k). The vulnerability can only be exploited when unicast routing is enabled on the Bridge Domain (BD). DHCP and DHCP relay do not have to be configured for the vulnerability to be exploited. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg38918.
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 vulnerability in the DHCPv6 feature of Cisco Nexus 9000 Series Fabric Switches in ACI Mode allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause low memory conditions by sending malicious DHCPv6 packets, potentially causing device reboot. The vulnerability stems from improper memory management during DHCPv6 packet processing and only affects IPv6 traffic when unicast routing is enabled on the Bridge Domain.
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= 13.0\(1k\)CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Cisco Nexus 9000 Series in ACI ModeRun 'show version' or 'show running-config' to identify the device model and confirm it is a Nexus 9000 Series Fabric Switches running in ACI modeAffected if Device is not a Nexus 9000 Series in ACI mode, then not affected by this specific CVE
-
Verify installed software versionRun 'show version' and look for version 13.0(1k) specifically. Compare your installed NX-OS version against the affected version 13.0(1k)Affected if The installed version is exactly 13.0(1k)
-
Check if DHCPv6 is configuredRun 'show running-config dhcpv6' or search for dhcpv6-related configuration in the running configuration to determine if DHCPv6 feature is in useAffected if DHCPv6 is not configured or not in use, the vulnerability is not reachable
-
Confirm unicast routing is enabled on Bridge DomainRun 'show bridge-domain' or 'show running-config bridge-domain' to check the Bridge Domain configuration and determine if unicast routing is enabled for IPv6Affected if Unicast routing is NOT enabled on the Bridge Domain, the attack vector is not present
-
Verify IPv6 is enabled on the affected Bridge DomainRun 'show ip6 interface' or check the Bridge Domain IPv6 settings to confirm IPv6 traffic is enabledAffected if IPv6 is not enabled, the DHCPv6 packets cannot trigger the vulnerability
A Nexus 9000 Series switch in ACI mode running version 13.0(1k) with DHCPv6 configured, unicast routing enabled on a Bridge Domain, and IPv6 traffic enabled is 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 dataDisable unicast routing on affected Bridge Domains as a workaround, or apply the Cisco software update addressing CVE-2018-0372. The vulnerability affects version 13.0(1k) specifically.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0372 — 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-2018-0372 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