Eugeny Russh: Infinite Loop (CVE-2026-116774)
Published Last modified Sources: OSV, Hersteller, CVE.org
What is affected, what to do
Update russh to version 0.65.
- Affected
- Eugeny Russh
gte 0.60.0, < 0.65.0..*
- Eugeny Russh
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
4.3
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v3
4.3
CVSS v3
Severity Medium on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: OSV, Hersteller, CVE.org
0.3 %
EPSS score
Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 17.7
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Medium
Priority (0–325)
The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?
Read in glossary- 54.00 Methodology
Exploit maturity
An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.
Read in glossary- no public PoC known
XIEM Effective CVSS
XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.
Read in glossary- 4.3 Methodology
CVSS v3
CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.
Read in glossary- 4.3
EPSS score
The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.
Read in glossary- 0.3 %
- Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
EPSS percentile
The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.
Read in glossary- 17.7
- Elevated — this CVE ranks above at least 10% of all CVEs scored today.
KEV status
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossary- —
- Published
- CISA assessment (SSVC)
- Exploitation: none known · not automatable · Technical impact: partial
- Source: CISA Vulnrichment, as of 28 October 2026
CWE
CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.
Read in glossary- CWE-400, CWE-835
Detection rules
No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.
Classification under NIS2 and CRA
Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.
NIS2
NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.
Read in glossary- Handle the vulnerability in regular vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2.
CRA
The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.
Read in glossary- From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
ISO/IEC 27001
ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.
Read in glossary- Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.
Description
Summary
A peer can advertise maximum packet size = 0 in its channel-open message (CHANNEL_OPEN when attacking a server, CHANNEL_OPEN_CONFIRMATION when attacking a client). russh accepts the value without validation and copies it into the channel write state, where it caps the size of every outgoing data chunk. In the AsyncWrite code path (ChannelTx::poll_writable, used by Channel::data(), Channel::make_writer() and Channel::into_stream()), a cap of 0 makes every write future stay Poll::Pending forever: writable = max_packet_size.min(window_size).min(buf_len) is always 0, and no future event can ever raise it (a static maximum packet size of 0 can never be satisfied by any amount of peer-granted window). The write neither completes nor errors, so the application task hangs silently.
Every other write path in russh already treats max_packet_size == 0 as an error (Error::Inconsistent): Channel::reserve_writable_chunk (russh/src/channels/mod.rs:363-365) and the session packetizers (russh/src/session.rs:489-492 and 549-552). The AsyncWrite path is the only one that lacks the guard - it contradicts the crate's own invariant.
Root cause
(1) Peer value accepted without validation:
russh/src/parsing.rs:44(OpenChannelMessage::parse):let maxpacket = map_err!(u32::decode(r))?;stored asrecipient_maximum_packet_size(:25-30); no range check. Same forChannelOpenConfirmation::decodeatrussh/src/parsing.rs:194-207.- The only packet-size validation anywhere is an upper bound on the local config that merely logs (
russh/src/client/mod.rs:1189-1194,russh/src/server/mod.rs:912-917). Nothing validates the peer's value - 0 passes silently.
(2) The value flows into the channel write state verbatim:
- Server:
russh/src/server/encrypted.rs:1877-1900-ChannelParams { recipient_maximum_packet_size: msg.recipient_maximum_packet_size, .. }, thenChannel::new(..., channel_params.recipient_maximum_packet_size, ...). - Client:
russh/src/client/encrypted.rs:471-488-parameters.confirm(&msg)(russh/src/lib_inner.rs:519-523) andChannelMsg::Open { max_packet_size: msg.maximum_packet_size, .. }, consumed bywait_channel_confirmation(russh/src/client/mod.rs:698-722), which buildsChannelWriteHalf { max_packet_size, .. }. - The write half hands the value to the writer:
make_writer_ext(russh/src/channels/mod.rs:433-441) andinto_stream(russh/src/channels/mod.rs:661-670) passself.max_packet_sizetoChannelTx::new.
(3) The hang - russh/src/channels/io/tx.rs:82-108 (current v0.64.1, byte-identical in v0.60.0):
fn poll_writable(&mut self, cx: &mut Context<'_>, buf_len: usize) -> Poll<NonZeroUsize> {
...
let writable = (self.max_packet_size).min(*window_size).min(buf_len as u32) as usize;
match NonZeroUsize::try_from(writable) {
Ok(w) => {
*window_size -= writable as u32;
if *window_size > 0 {
self.notify.notify_one();
}
Poll::Ready(w)
}
Err(_) => {
drop(window_size);
ready!(self.window_size_notication.poll_unpin(cx));
self.window_size_notication = WatchNotification::new(Arc::clone(&self.notify));
cx.waker().wake_by_ref();
Poll::Pending
}
}
}
With max_packet_size == 0, writable is always 0 regardless of window_size and buf_len; the task parks on the window notification, gets re-polled on every CHANNEL_WINDOW_ADJUST, recomputes 0, and parks again - forever.
(4) The guard exists everywhere else:
// russh/src/channels/mod.rs:363-365 (used by send_bytes -> data_bytes / extended_data_bytes)
if self.max_packet_size == 0 {
return Err(Error::Inconsistent);
}
// russh/src/session.rs:490-492 and :550-552 (packetizer)
if max_packet_size == 0 {
return Err(crate::Error::Inconsistent);
}
Note that Channel::data(reader) (russh/src/channels/mod.rs:321-323) goes through send_data -> tokio::io::copy(&mut data, &mut tx) (:350-360) into the same ChannelTx, so the primary documented data API hangs as well; only the *_bytes variants reach the guard.
Attack scenarios
- Server (authenticated remote DoS): with the default configuration, an authenticated client opens a session channel advertising
maximum packet size = 0. Whenever the server application writes on that channel throughAsyncWrite(echo, shell prompts, SFTP - russh's own examples echo viainto_stream()), the write future never completes. The handler task is stranded and no error surfaces, so application cleanup paths do not trigger. Repeat per channel and per connection; keep-alive traffic resets the serverinactivity_timeout(default 600 s), so stranded resources persist as long as the attacker wants. - Client (malicious server): a malicious or buggy server confirms an opened channel with
maximum packet size = 0; the client application's writes on that channel stall forever. The clientinactivity_timeoutdefaults toNone, so nothing ever tears the session down. - This is distinct from a
window_size == 0stall: a zero window is dynamic flow control that a well-behaved peer releases as soon as its buffers drain, whilemaximum packet sizeis a static peer declaration where 0 can never be satisfied by any future packet. RFC 4254 section 5.1 recommends a minimum of 32768 - legitimate peers do not send 0.
Impact
Permanent, silent denial of service for the affected writes, with stranded tasks/channels/connections that accumulate for the attacker - resource exhaustion of a server or of a client application. Because the failure mode is Poll::Pending instead of Err, ordinary application mitigations (error handling, timeouts on writes, connection teardown) do not engage on their own.
Reproducer
Two stock russh instances are enough (no raw SSH crafting required):
- Server: default config plus a host key;
channel_open_sessionaccepts and echoes usingtokio::io::copyintochannel.into_stream()(the pattern from russh's own examples). - Client: default config except
config.maximum_packet_size = 0(accepted silently; see above), thenauthenticate_publickey,channel_open_session().await,channel.data(&b"hello"[..]).await.
The client's CHANNEL_OPEN goes out with maximum packet size = 0 (russh/src/client/session.rs:21-44 encodes self.common.config.maximum_packet_size verbatim). All three scenarios below were verified end-to-end against a stock russh v0.64.1 build (ring backend), default settings otherwise:
- control (both sides default, 32768): the server echoes and the client receives
hello; - client
maximum_packet_size = 0: the server prints the received bytes and then the echo write never completes - no data, no error, the client times out; - server
maximum_packet_size = 0: the client'schannel.data(...)future never completes - no error, it times out.
Observed output (abridged):
=== SCENARIO A (control): both sides default (maxpacket 32768) ===
[server] read 5 bytes; echoing via AsyncWrite ...
[server] echo write completed
RESULT A: echo received: "hello"
=== SCENARIO B: client advertises maximum_packet_size = 0 ===
[server] read 5 bytes; echoing via AsyncWrite ...
RESULT B: TIMEOUT after 6s - server-side echo write is permanently stalled (no error, no data)
=== SCENARIO C: server advertises maximum_packet_size = 0 ===
RESULT C: TIMEOUT after 6s - client-side channel.data() is permanently stalled
The server task stays parked inside ChannelTx::poll_writable; nothing is logged and nothing is returned to the handler. The harness source (server: into_stream() echo; client: one config toggle) can be attached on request.
Unit-level sketch of the core defect:
let mut tx = ChannelTx::<Msg>::new(
sender, ChannelId(0),
Arc::new(Mutex::new(4096)), // window_size
Arc::new(Notify::new()), // notify
0,
Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities), GitHub Security Advisories, cvelistv5, NVD (NIST)
Affected products
The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Eugeny | russh |
|
|
| crates.io | russh |
|
|
| rust | russh |
|
|
Vendors and products
Weakness classes (CWE)
CWE-400Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
Class
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
Entry at MITRE CWE-400CWE-835Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop')
Base
The product contains an iteration or loop with an exit condition that cannot be reached, i.e., an infinite loop.
Entry at MITRE CWE-835
References & sources
- github.comEugeny/russh/commit/39cb9dbaa37caf555d34c6c22efa3bbbff9e186cx_refsource_MISC, web
- github.comEugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.65.0x_refsource_MISC, web
- github.comEugeny/russh/security/advisories/GHSA-fw5c-8223-6h42x_refsource_CONFIRM, web
- NVD (NIST)vuln/detail/CVE-2026-116774advisory
- github.comEugeny/russhpackage
Changes to this CVE
Who changed this CVE and when: NVD (analysis, affected products, CVSS), the CVE publisher (CNA) and additional providers such as CISA (ADP).
Record modifiedCISA ADP
CISA assessment (SSVC): exploitation: none known, automatable: no
Show the original change
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After SSVC assessment added —{"id":"CVE-2026-116774","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"no"},{"technicalImpact":"partial"}],"version":"2.0.3","timestamp":"2026-10-28T14:34:53.983359Z"}Source identifier: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
ReceivedGitHub
CVSS V3.1: AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Weakness type: CWE-400, CWE-835
Description added or changed
Show 8 original changes
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After Description added —russh is a Rust SSH client and server library that includes an SSH agent protocol implementation. From 0.60.0 until 0.65.0, channel-open parsing accepts a peer-declared maximum_packet_size of zero and passes it into ChannelTx::poll_writable in russh/src/channels/io/tx.rs. The Channel::data, Channel::make_writer, and Channel::into_stream asynchronous write paths then calculate a writable size of zero and remain pending forever because window adjustments cannot satisfy a static zero packet maximum. An authenticated client can strand server writes, and a malicious server can strand client writes, allowing affected tasks, channels, and connections to accumulate without surfacing an error. This issue is fixed in version 0.65.0.CVSS added —AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LWeakness type (CWE) added —CWE-400Weakness type (CWE) added —CWE-835Affected versions (publisher) added —New affected value received. <a href="https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/blob/main/cves/2026/116xxx/CVE-2026-116774.json">CVE-2026-116774</a>Reference added —https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/commit/39cb9dbaa37caf555d34c6c22efa3bbbff9e186cReference added —https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.65.0Reference added —https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/security/advisories/GHSA-fw5c-8223-6h42Source identifier: security-advisories@github.com
Embed badge
Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.
<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-116774"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-116774.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-116774 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>