Remote SMF crash via unhandled NAMF response
Published Aug 10, 2025 · Updated Aug 15, 2025
Denial of service in Open5GS SMF 2.7.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to crash the SMF through an invalid NAMF communication response. During PFCP deletion, smf_gsm_state_wait_pfcp_deletion lacks a NAMF_COMM case, routes the response to its invalid-API default, and terminates on an assertion. Reaching the vulnerable session state over core-network interfaces is required, and the demonstrated consequence is termination of the SMF process.
Summary
What happened
Denial of service in Open5GS SMF 2.7.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to crash the SMF through an invalid NAMF communication response. During PFCP deletion, smf_gsm_state_wait_pfcp_deletion lacks a NAMF_COMM case, routes the response to its invalid-API default, and terminates on an assertion. Reaching the vulnerable session state over core-network interfaces is required, and the demonstrated consequence is termination of the SMF process.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2025-8805
- Published
- Aug 10, 2025
- Updated
- Aug 15, 2025
- Vendor
- Open5GS
- Product
- Open5GS
- Classifications
- CWE-404, T1499.004
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Aug 10, 2025CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Aug 15, 2025Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=2.7.0
- Affected versionversion=2.7.1
- Affected versionversion=2.7.2
- Affected versionversion=2.7.3
- Affected versionversion=2.7.4
- Affected versionversion=2.7.5
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
- smf_crash.zip proof of conceptproof of concept · demonstrated
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo