CVE-2025-70102
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 NULL pointer dereference occurs in Roy Marples NetworkConfiguration/dhcpcd 10.3.0 while parsing configuration options. In parse_option() (src/if-options.c:1886), the code performs a member access on a NULL pointer of type 'struct dhcp_opt' when an unexpected/invalid option token or parsing state causes the lookup to yield NULL. The instrumented fuzzing build reports 'runtime error: member access within null pointer of type struct dhcp_opt' and aborts.
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 NULL pointer dereference vulnerability exists in dhcpcd 10.3.0's parse_option() function in src/if-options.c. When parsing DHCP configuration options, if an invalid or unexpected option token is encountered, the option lookup returns NULL. The code then attempts to access a member on this NULL pointer of type 'struct dhcp_opt', causing an abort. This is a denial-of-service vulnerability exploitable by providing malformed configuration options.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Identify dhcpcd installation and versionRun 'dhcpcd --version' or check package manager (e.g., 'dpkg -l dhcpcd', 'rpm -q dhcpcd') to determine the installed versionAffected if Version is 10.3.0 exactly (no other versions are listed as affected)
-
Locate dhcpcd configuration filesCheck for dhcpcd.conf typically at /etc/dhcpcd.conf, /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf, or in /etc/dhcpcd/ directory; also check for any included configuration filesAffected if Configuration files exist and are being parsed by the vulnerable dhcpcd version
-
Identify DHCP client configuration in useReview network interface configurations (e.g., in /etc/network/interfaces, /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/, or via systemd .network files) to identify which interfaces use dhcpcd for IP assignmentAffected if Any network interface is configured to obtain IP addresses via dhcpcd and uses the vulnerable binary
-
Verify option parsing is activeCheck if dhcpcd is running as a service or daemon ('ps aux | grep dhcpcd' or 'systemctl status dhcpcd') and is actively managing interfaces with DHCPAffected if dhcpcd daemon is running and actively parsing DHCP options on any interface
You are affected only if dhcpcd version 10.3.0 is installed AND it is actively parsing DHCP configuration files on your system.
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 dataAdd NULL pointer validation before accessing the dhcp_opt struct member in parse_option(); ensure invalid option tokens are properly handled with error reporting rather than dereferencing a NULL pointer. Update to patched versions when available.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-70102 — 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-2025-70102 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