BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-59530High confidence

quic-go has Client Crash Due to Premature HANDSHAKE_DONE Frame

quic-go · quic-go

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-47M2-4CR7-MHCW ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

7.5HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 2 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.46% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs quic-go quic-go and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 2 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

5 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 2 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcegolang-github-lucas-clemente-quic-goAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcegolang-github-lucas-clemente-quic-goAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcegolang-github-lucas-clemente-quic-goVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.0.54.1-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcegolang-github-lucas-clemente-quic-goVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.0.54.1-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivegolang-github-lucas-clemente-quic-goUnder evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Open-source package ranges4 source-attributed ranges

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
Gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-goSEMVER: introduced 0; fixed 0.49.10.49.1OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026
Gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-goSEMVER: introduced 0.50.0; fixed 0.54.10.54.1OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026
gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-go< 0.49.10.49.1GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 5 Nov 2025
gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-go>= 0.50.0, < 0.54.10.54.1GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 5 Nov 2025
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2025-59530 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitygithub.com/quic-go/quic-go: quic-go Crash Due to Premature HANDSHAKE_DONE Frame
13 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • openshift-service-mesh/grafana-rhel8 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/istio-cni-rhel8 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/istio-must-gather-rhel9 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/istio-operator-bundle as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/istio-rhel8-operator as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/pilot-rhel8 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/proxyv2-rhel9 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift-service-mesh/ratelimit-rhel8 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • rhacm2/volsync-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2
  • advanced-cluster-security/rhacs-main-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security 4
  • advanced-cluster-security/rhacs-roxctl-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security 4
  • devspaces/traefik-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat OpenShift Dev Spaces
Summary
A denial of service flaw has been discovered in the quic-go golang library. A misbehaving or malicious server can cause a denial-of-service (DoS) attack on the quic-go client by triggering an assertion failure, leading to a process crash. This requires no authentication and can be exploited during the handshake phase. This was observed in the wild with certain server implementations.
Remediation
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2025-33746

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 2 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

quic-go is an implementation of the QUIC protocol in Go. In versions prior to 0.49.0, 0.54.1, and 0.55.0, a misbehaving or malicious server can cause a denial-of-service (DoS) attack on the quic-go client by triggering an assertion failure, leading to a process crash. This requires no authentication and can be exploited during the handshake phase. This was observed in the wild with certain server implementations. quic-go needs to be able to handle misbehaving server implementations, including those that prematurely send a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame. Versions 0.49.0, 0.54.1, and 0.55.0 discard Initial keys when receiving a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame, thereby correctly handling premature HANDSHAKE_DONE frames.

What

quic-go is an implementation of the QUIC protocol in Go. In versions prior to 0.49.0, 0.54.1, and 0.55.0, a misbehaving or malicious server can cause a denial-of-service (DoS) attack on the quic-go client by triggering an assertion failure, leading to a process crash. This requires no authentication and can be exploited during the handshake phase. This was observed in the wild with certain server implementations. quic-go needs to be able to handle misbehaving server implementations, including those that prematurely send a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame. Versions 0.49.0, 0.54.1, and 0.55.0 discard Initial keys when receiving a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame, thereby correctly handling premature HANDSHAKE_DONE frames.

Why

The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.

What

quic-go is an implementation of the QUIC protocol in Go. In versions prior to 0.49.0, 0.54.1, and 0.55.0, a misbehaving or malicious server can cause a denial-of-service (DoS) attack on the quic-go client by triggering an assertion failure, leading to a process crash. This requires no authentication and can be exploited during the handshake phase. This was observed in the wild with certain server implementations. quic-go needs to be able to handle misbehaving server implementations, including those that prematurely send a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame. Versions 0.49.0, 0.54.1, and 0.55.0 discard Initial keys when receiving a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame, thereby correctly handling premature HANDSHAKE_DONE frames.

Why

The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Reachable Assertion → disrupt the affected service
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-617 ↗

CWE-617: Reachable Assertion. The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedDenial of serviceCWE-617
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-2635Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform: Schwachstelle ermöglicht Denial of Service

Ein entfernter, anonymer Angreifer kann eine Schwachstelle in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20251015Security Bulletin 15 Oct 2025

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 15 Oct 2025, published on 15 October 2025. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1036Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

d?id=CVE-2025-53057 Référence CVE CVE-2025-53066 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-53066 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58058 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58058 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58183 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58183 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58185 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58185 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58186 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58186 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58187 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58187 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58188 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58188 Référence CVE CVE-2025-58189 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-58189 Référence CVE CVE-2025-59530 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-59530 Référence CVE CVE-2025-5981 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-5981 Référence CVE CVE-2025-6069 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-6069 Référence CVE CVE-2025-61723 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-61723 Référence CVE CVE-2025-61724 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-61724 Référence CVE CVE-2025-61725 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-61725 Référence CVE CVE-2025-61748 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-61748 Référence CVE CVE-2025-61795 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-61795 Référence CVE CVE-2025-64329 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0941Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Microsoft

: CERT-FR Avis du CERT-FR Objet: Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Microsoft Gestion du document Référence CERTFR-2025-AVI-0941 Titre Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Microsoft Date de la première version 30 octobre 2025 Date de la dernière version 30 octobre 2025 Source(s) Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-11839 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40018 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40019 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40778 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40780 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-59530 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-62518 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-8677 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40020 du 26 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40021 du 26 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40024 du 26 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-11840 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40025 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40026 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40027 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40029

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 10 Oct 2025 · Last source change 10 Oct 2025, 16:31 UTC · CWE-617 · Reachable Assertion

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-33746
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    < 0.49.1; >= 0.5.0, < 0.54.1 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
    After
    < 0.49.1; >= 0.5.0, < 0.54.1 · Fixed: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
  2. Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.
    Before
    Awaiting fix
    After
    Patch available
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release recorded from official guidance
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-33746↗Red Hat Product Security security advisory↗CVE authority or vendor reference · GitHub GHSA-47M2-4CR7-MHCW↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2025-59530 · cve.blacktree.nl