CVE-2020-7216
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 · uneditedAn ni_dhcp4_parse_response memory leak in openSUSE wicked 0.6.55 and earlier allows network attackers to cause a denial of service by sending DHCP4 packets without a message type option.
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 · moderate confidenceA memory leak exists in the ni_dhcp4_parse_response function of openSUSE wicked network management daemon versions 0.6.55 and earlier. When the daemon processes specially crafted DHCP4 packets that lack the required message type option, memory allocated during parsing is not properly freed, leading to gradual memory exhaustion 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<= 0.6.55= 15.1CVSS 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:3.1/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.
-
Verify wicked package is installedCheck if the wicked network management daemon package exists on the system using the package manager (rpm -q wicked or dpkg -l wicked)Affected if The wicked package is installed and the version cannot be determined or is at or below 0.6.55
-
Determine installed wicked versionRun 'rpm -q --queryformat "%{VERSION}\n" wicked' or check the package version through the system's package management toolAffected if The installed version is 0.6.55 or earlier, or the version cannot be determined (package installed but version query fails)
-
Confirm openSUSE Leap version if applicableIf running openSUSE Leap, check the release version with 'cat /etc/os-release' or 'lsb_release -a'Affected if The system is openSUSE Leap 15.1, which ships with the vulnerable wicked version
-
Check if wicked DHCP4 service is in useInspect whether the wicked service is enabled and active for network management, particularly DHCP4 client functionality (systemctl status wicked or checking /etc/init.d/wicked status)Affected if The wicked service is running and actively managing DHCP4 network interfaces, making it susceptible to specially crafted DHCP4 packets
The environment is affected if openSUSE wicked version 0.6.55 or earlier is installed and the DHCP4 service is active, as the memory leak only triggers when processing DHCP4 responses lacking the message type option.
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 openSUSE wicked to version 0.6.66 or later which contains the fix for proper memory management in DHCP4 response parsing, or apply vendor-supplied patches to address the missing message type option handling.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-7216 — 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-2020-7216 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