Packet Core GatewayApplication · Ericsson

CVE-2026-25659

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-05
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 1.30 or later.
See remediation →
70/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Ericsson Packet Core Gateway (PCG) versions prior to 1.30 contain an Improper Handling of Missing Values (CWE-230) vulnerability where an attacker continuously sending a specially crafted message can cause service degradation. The impact continues as long the attack persists but the system recovers from the crashes when the attack stops.

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 confidence

Ericsson Packet Core Gateway versions before 1.30 improperly handle missing values in specially crafted messages (CWE-230). An unauthenticated remote attacker can continuously send these crafted messages to cause service degradation; the system self-recovers once the attack traffic ceases.

MitigationUpgrade Ericsson Packet Core Gateway to version 1.30 or later to remediate this improper handling of missing values vulnerability.

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
Packet Core GatewayApplication
Affected:< 1.30

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
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed Packet Core Gateway version
    Use the product's CLI, web interface, or system management tools to retrieve the current software version. Common methods include 'show version' command, checking the about/admin page in the GUI, or querying the system's software information API if available.
    Affected if The displayed version number is below 1.30 (for example, 1.20, 1.25, 1.28.x, etc.)
  2. Verify network accessibility of the gateway
    Confirm that the Packet Core Gateway management interface or signaling ports are reachable from untrusted networks. Check firewall rules and network segmentation configurations.
    Affected if The gateway is exposed to the internet or untrusted networks without proper filtering, allowing unauthenticated attackers to send messages to it
  3. Review logs for service degradation indicators
    Examine system and application logs for patterns of service degradation, repeated errors, or unusual message processing failures. Look for entries correlating with the timing of any observed performance issues.
    Affected if Logs show recurring service degradation episodes that align with external message traffic patterns, especially from unauthenticated sources

You are affected if your Ericsson Packet Core Gateway version is below 1.30 and the service is reachable by unauthenticated remote attackers.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 1.30 or later
Fixed in 1.30
Interim mitigation

Upgrade Ericsson Packet Core Gateway to version 1.30 or later to remediate this improper handling of missing values vulnerability.

Recommended fix High confidence

Packet Core Gateway version 1.30

  1. Schedule a maintenance window for the Packet Core Gateway upgrade
  2. Review Ericsson release notes for version 1.30 to understand any specific upgrade requirements
  3. Ensure proper backups of current configuration are in place
  4. Follow Ericsson standard upgrade procedure for Packet Core Gateway to version 1.30
  5. Verify the upgrade was successful and the service is functioning normally
  6. Monitor the system for any abnormal behavior after upgrade

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Packet Core Gateway Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-25659 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-25659 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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