CVE-2025-8872
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 · uneditedOn affected platforms running Arista EOS with OSPFv3 configured, a specially crafted packet can cause the OSFPv3 process to have high CPU utilization which may result in the OSFPv3 process being restarted. This may cause disruption in the OSFPv3 routes on the switch. This issue was discovered internally by Arista and is not aware of any malicious uses of this issue in customer networks.
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 denial-of-service vulnerability in Arista EOS OSPFv3 implementation allows specially crafted packets to trigger high CPU utilization in the OSPFv3 process, causing the process to restart and disrupt OSPFv3 routing on affected switches.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 device is Arista EOSRun 'show version' and verify the vendor is Arista and the OS is EOSAffected if Device is not running Arista EOS - not affected
-
Check EOS software versionRun 'show version' and note the EOS version numberAffected if Version matches or precedes the patched release (compare against Arista security advisories)
-
Verify OSPFv3 is configuredRun 'show running-config | include ospf' or 'show ipv6 ospf' to check for OSPFv3 configurationAffected if No OSPFv3 configuration exists - not affected (vulnerability requires OSPFv3 to be enabled)
-
Identify interfaces with OSPFv3 enabledRun 'show ipv6 ospf interface brief' to list interfaces running OSPFv3Affected if No interfaces have OSPFv3 enabled - not affected
-
Check OSPFv3 process status and CPU usageRun 'show processes cpu history' and 'show ipv6 ospf neighbor' to verify OSPFv3 is actively runningAffected if OSPFv3 process is not running or no neighbors exist - lower risk but version still matters
Affected if running Arista EOS with OSPFv3 enabled on any interface, regardless of version until patched.
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 Arista EOS patches when available; until then, restrict OSPFv3 packet receipt to trusted neighbors via interface access lists or route-map filters to limit exposure to untrusted packets.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-8872 — 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-2025-8872 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