CVE-2026-30075
Memory Safety in Openairinterface Oai-Cn5G-Amf 2.2.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-30075 is a high-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Openairinterface Oai-Cn5G-Amf. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 31th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-30075 is a buffer overflow vulnerability (CWE-120) affecting OpenAirInterface version 2.2.0, specifically in the AUSF (Authentication Server Function) component of the OAI-CN5G suite. The issue arises during processing of an UplinkNASTransport message containing an Authentication Response with a NAS PDU that includes an oversize response, such as one exceeding 100 bytes. The AMF (Access and Mobility Management Function) decodes the response and forwards it to AUSF for verification, triggering the overflow and subsequent crash in AUSF. The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H), indicating high availability impact with no confidentiality or integrity effects.
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely over the network by unauthenticated attackers with low complexity and no user interaction required. An attacker crafts and sends a malicious UplinkNASTransport message with an oversized Authentication Response NAS PDU, which causes the AUSF component to crash upon receipt. This results in a denial-of-service condition, preventing legitimate users from completing registration and authentication processes.
The issue is tracked in GitLab repositories for the oai-cn5g-ausf project, specifically issue #6, where details on the buffer overflow and its impact on AUSF are documented. No specific patch or mitigation details are outlined in the provided CVE references.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-20509
Vulnerability Data
OpenAirInterface Version 2.2.0 has a Buffer Overflow vulnerability in processing UplinkNASTransport containing Authentication Response containing a NAS PDU with oversize response (For example 100 byte). The response is decoded by AMF and passed to the AUSF component for verification. AUSF…
more
crashes on receiving this oversize response. This can prohibit users from further registration and verification and can cause Denial of Services (DoS).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.
Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.
Engineering principles require bounds checking and safe buffer handling in design.
Memory protection limits the impact of an overflow once it occurs.
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.
Secure development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.
Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.
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.
Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.
Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.
Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.