Skip to content

zeroconf: Unbounded exception-dedup state retains packet buffers via traceback frame locals, enabling LAN-local memory exhaustion

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 21, 2026 in python-zeroconf/python-zeroconf

Package

pip zeroconf (pip)

Affected versions

< 0.149.6

Patched versions

0.149.6

Description

Impact

DNSIncoming._log_exception_debug and the four QuietLogger exception-dedup methods stored an unbounded _seen_logs dict keyed by str(sys.exc_info()[1]). The seven IncomingDecodeError messages raised from _read_name / _decode_labels_at_offset (RFC 6762 §18 name-decoding error paths) all embed self.source — the peer's ephemeral source port, varying per packet — plus byte offset and pointer link, so every attacker-influenced combination produced a fresh dedup key. The stored value was the full sys.exc_info() triple, whose traceback's frame locals retained self.data (the raw inbound packet, up to 8966 bytes per RFC 6762 §17). Each unique malformed packet therefore pinned ~9 KB until process exit.

Any unauthenticated host on the local link (UDP/5353, 224.0.0.251 / ff02::fb) can drive memory growth at line rate; that includes a guest on the same Wi-Fi, a compromised IoT device, or a container on a shared bridge. On memory-constrained deployments (Home Assistant on Raspberry-Pi-class hardware is the canonical victim) sustained traffic trivially OOM-kills the process, and mDNS-dependent features (HomeKit, Chromecast/Matter, AirPlay, printers) degrade or fail.

Patches

Fixed in zeroconf 0.149.6 (PR #1717). Upgrade to >= 0.149.6.

Workarounds

There is no in-process workaround; upgrading is the fix. Otherwise, restrict mDNS (UDP/5353) to trusted Layer-2 segments via AP client isolation, guest-network separation, or host firewall rules.

Resources

References

@bdraco bdraco published to python-zeroconf/python-zeroconf May 21, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 29, 2026
Reviewed May 29, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(6th percentile)

Weaknesses

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-47183

GHSA ID

GHSA-phvx-9mgw-67r5
Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.