frrouting: Missing Critical Step in Authentication (CVE-2026-119776)
Published Sources: BSI
What is affected, what to do
In all prior released versions of FRRouting, the OSPFv3 (for IPv6) implementation does not check that OSPFv3 packets have a link-local source address and either a link-local destination or one of the protocol multicast destination groups. This may enable malicious actors to establish OSPFv3 adjacencies from unexpectedly, distant IPv6 hosts.
The available sources name no fixed version. Check the vendor guidance in the references below.
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
6.1
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v4
6.1
CVSS v4
Severity Medium on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: BSI
0.4 %
EPSS score
Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 33.9
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- 69.71 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- 6.1 Methodology
CVSS v4
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- 6.1
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- 0.4 %
- 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- 33.9
- 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
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-304
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
In all prior released versions of FRRouting, the OSPFv3 (for IPv6) implementation does not check that OSPFv3 packets have a link-local source address and either a link-local destination or one of the protocol multicast destination groups. This may enable malicious actors to establish OSPFv3 adjacencies from unexpectedly, distant IPv6 hosts. Proper usage of OSPFv3 authentication trailers (RFC 7166, as is best practice) prevents full exploitation of this issue, though may allow a malicious actor to waste CPU on authentication checks. Note the linked PR #23935 is not sufficient to fix the issue as it only verifies the source address. It is the destination address that must be checked. Required configuration: The OSPFv3 for IPv6 routing protocol must be running (ospf6d process) and in use (enabled globally with "router ospf6" and on specific interfaces with "ipv6 ospf6 area".) Workaround: either: * configure OSPFv3 authentication trailers ("ipv6 ospf6 authentication") * or ensure through firewall configuration that only packets with link-local or multicast destination addresses are accepted on input for IPv6 protocol 89 (OSPF). Note that checking the source address is insufficient, as some routers may (unexpectedly) forward packets with global-scoped IPv6 destination addresses even if they have link-local source addresses.
Source: BSI WID Portal
Affected products
The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| frrouting | frrouting |
|
|
Vendors and products
Weakness classes (CWE)
CWE-304Missing Critical Step in Authentication
Base
The product implements an authentication technique, but it skips a step that weakens the technique.
Entry at MITRE CWE-304
References & sources
- github.comFRRouting/frr/pull/23935related
- github.comFRRouting/frr/pull/24183related
- github.comFRRouting/frr/pull/24183/changes/eaccfcdb35bce8d94621b06633417b…Patch
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 modified57a55968…
Description added or changed
Show the original change
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After Description changed In all prior released versions of FRRouting, the OSPFv3 (for IPv6) implementation does not check that OSPFv3 packets have a link-local source address and either a link-local destination or one of the protocol multicast destination groups. This may enable malicious actors to establish OSPFv3 adjacencies from unexpectedly, distant IPv6 hosts. Proper usage of OSPFv3 authentication trailers (RFC 7166, as is best practice) prevents full exploitation of this issue, though may allow a malicious actor to waste CPU on authentication checks. Note the linked PR #23935 is not sufficient to fix the issue as it only verifies the source address. It is the destination address that must be checked.In all prior released versions of FRRouting, the OSPFv3 (for IPv6) implementation does not check that OSPFv3 packets have a link-local source address and either a link-local destination or one of the protocol multicast destination groups. This may enable malicious actors to establish OSPFv3 adjacencies from unexpectedly, distant IPv6 hosts. Proper usage of OSPFv3 authentication trailers (RFC 7166, as is best practice) prevents full exploitation of this issue, though may allow a malicious actor to waste CPU on authentication checks. Note the linked PR #23935 is not sufficient to fix the issue as it only verifies the source address. It is the destination address that must be checked. Required configuration: The OSPFv3 for IPv6 routing protocol must be running (ospf6d process) and in use (enabled globally with "router ospf6" and on specific interfaces with "ipv6 ospf6 area".) Workaround: either: * configure OSPFv3 authentication trailers ("ipv6 ospf6 authentication") * or ensure through firewall configuration that only packets with link-local or multicast destination addresses are accepted on input for IPv6 protocol 89 (OSPF). Note that checking the source address is insufficient, as some routers may (unexpectedly) forward packets with global-scoped IPv6 destination addresses even if they have link-local source addresses.Source identifier: 57a55968-44ac-464c-a794-6ba3baad09c4
Received57a55968…
CVSS V4.0: AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/AU:Y
Weakness type: CWE-304
Description added or changed
Show 7 original changes
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After Description added —In all prior released versions of FRRouting, the OSPFv3 (for IPv6) implementation does not check that OSPFv3 packets have a link-local source address and either a link-local destination or one of the protocol multicast destination groups. This may enable malicious actors to establish OSPFv3 adjacencies from unexpectedly, distant IPv6 hosts. Proper usage of OSPFv3 authentication trailers (RFC 7166, as is best practice) prevents full exploitation of this issue, though may allow a malicious actor to waste CPU on authentication checks. Note the linked PR #23935 is not sufficient to fix the issue as it only verifies the source address. It is the destination address that must be checked.CVSS added —AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:Y/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XWeakness type (CWE) added —CWE-304Affected versions (publisher) added —New affected value received. <a href="https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/blob/main/cves/2026/119xxx/CVE-2026-119776.json">CVE-2026-119776</a>Reference added —https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/23935Reference added —https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/24183Reference added —https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/24183/changes/eaccfcdb35bce8d94621b06633417ba3fa657f34Source identifier: 57a55968-44ac-464c-a794-6ba3baad09c4
Linked CVEs
| Medium | CVE-2026-119776 | frr: ospf6d fails to enforce all OSPFv3 packets use IPv6 link-local addresses | — | — |
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-2026-119776"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-119776.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-119776 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>