Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-54804

Memory Safety in Russh Project Russh ≤ 0.54.1

Public PoCMemory Safety
Published
05 August 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0039 32th percentile
Risk Priority 50 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-54804 is a medium-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Russh Project Russh. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 32th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Russh is a Rust SSH client & server library. In versions 0.54.0 and below, the channel window adjust message of the SSH protocol is used to track the free space in the receive buffer of the other side of a…

more

channel. The current implementation takes the value from the message and adds it to an internal state value. This can result in a integer overflow. If the Rust code is compiled with overflow checks, it will panic. A malicious client can crash a server. This is fixed in version 0.54.1.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-43410Same product: Russh Project Russh
CVE-2026-42189Same product: Russh Project Russh
CVE-2023-28113Same product: Russh Project Russh
CVE-2023-48712Same product: Warpgate Project Warpgate
CVE-2024-49994Shared CWE-190
CVE-2026-37540Shared CWE-190
CVE-2026-24210Shared CWE-190
CVE-2026-53482Shared CWE-190
CVE-2024-26817Shared CWE-190
CVE-2025-22081Shared CWE-190

Affected Assets

russh project
russh
≤ 0.54.1
warpgate project
warpgate
≤ 0.16.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V5.2.6

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, unit tests) directly finds integer overflow defects before deployment.

Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.

Input validation enforces bounds on values before arithmetic, stopping the conditions that trigger overflow or wraparound.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

finds

Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.

degrades

Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.

degrades

Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.

References