CVE-2023-7250
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 flaw was found in iperf, a utility for testing network performance using TCP, UDP, and SCTP. A malicious or malfunctioning client can send less than the expected amount of data to the iperf server, which can cause the server to hang indefinitely waiting for the remainder or until the connection gets closed. This will prevent other connections to the server, leading to a denial of service.
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 confidenceThe iperf server does not properly handle clients that send less data than expected, causing it to hang indefinitely waiting for the remaining data. This blocks the connection and prevents other clients from connecting, resulting 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 data= 8.0= 9.0= 8.0_aarch64= 9.0_aarch64= 8.0_s390x= 9.0_s390x= 8.0_ppc64le< 3.15CVSS 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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
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.
-
Check if iperf3 is installedRun 'rpm -qa | grep iperf3' on RHEL systems, or 'dpkg -l | grep iperf3' on Debian-based systems, or check for the iperf3 binary with 'which iperf3'Affected if iperf3 package or binary is found on the system
-
Determine the installed iperf3 versionRun 'iperf3 --version' or 'rpm -q iperf3' to get the exact version numberAffected if The version is 3.15 or lower, or on RHEL 8.0/9.0 (any version), or for the specific architecture variants listed (8.0_aarch64, 9.0_aarch64, 8.0_s390x, 9.0_s390x, 8.0_ppc64le)
-
Identify if iperf3 is running as a serverCheck running processes with 'ps aux | grep iperf3' and look for 'iperf3 -s' or 'iperf3 --server' in the command line, or check if port 5201 is in use with 'netstat -tlnp | grep 5201'Affected if iperf3 is running in server mode ('-s' or '--server' flag) and accepting client connections
-
Verify the server is exposed to network clientsCheck network listening status with 'ss -tlnp | grep 5201' or 'netstat -tlnp | grep 5201' to confirm the iperf3 server is bound to an accessible interfaceAffected if The iperf3 server is listening on a network interface reachable by untrusted clients
-
Test for the hang conditionStart an iperf3 client and intentionally send less data than the specified amount (e.g., specify -n 1G but only transmit partial data, then close the connection), observe if the server hangsAffected if The server becomes unresponsive and stops accepting new connections after a client sends incomplete data
You are affected if iperf3 server is running and accessible, the version matches the affected ranges (RHEL 8.0/9.0 or iperf3 < 3.15), and the server can receive connections from untrusted clients
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.
dbcve · scoped3.15
Implement connection timeouts and proper state handling to prevent indefinite waiting. Consider network isolation of iperf servers and upgrading if a vendor patch becomes available.
iperf3 >= 3.15
- Update the iperf3 package to version 3.15 or later using the distribution's package manager (e.g., dnf update iperf3 or yum update iperf3)
- Restart any running iperf3 server instances to ensure the patched version is loaded
- Verify the installed version using 'iperf3 --version' to confirm version 3.15 or higher is installed
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-7250 — 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-2023-7250 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