CVE-2026-37232
Openairinterface5G 2.4.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-37232 is a high-severity Divide By Zero (CWE-369) vulnerability in Openairinterface Openairinterface5G. Its CVSS base score is 8.6 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 33th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
No EU or UK CSIRT advisories indexed for this CVE.
Vulnerability Data
An issue was discovered in OpenAirInterface5G 2.4.0 (nr-softmodem) in the E2SM-KPM RAN Function's PRB utilization metric calculation. The functions fill_RRU_PrbTotDl() and fill_RRU_PrbTotUl() in openair2/E2AP/RAN_FUNCTION/O-RAN/ran_func_kpm_subs.c (lines 182 and 197) compute PRB usage percentages by dividing by the difference of two consecutive…
more
total_prb_aggregate samples without checking for zero. When a malicious xApp sends a high volume of E42_RIC_SUBSCRIPTION_REQUESTs via the FlexRIC iApp (port 36422/SCTP), the E2 Agent generates KPM Indication reports at high frequency. If two consecutive sampling intervals yield identical PRB aggregate values, the divisor becomes zero, triggering SIGFPE and crashing the entire 5G base station process (nr-softmodem). This results in complete 5G cell service interruption for all connected UEs. No authentication is required.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including static/dynamic analysis) finds divide-by-zero conditions after they have been coded.
Security engineering principles can require safe-arithmetic constructs or explicit guards that keep division operands nonzero.
Validating numeric inputs before use as divisors structurally blocks zero values from reaching division operations.
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.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover divide-by-zero flaws via static analysis or testing.
Routine patching and replacement can remediate divide-by-zero bugs present in deployed software.
Secure SDLC practices directly include code analysis, input validation, and testing that prevent divide-by-zero errors.
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 development lifecycle includes input validation and error-handling practices that can prevent divide-by-zero faults.
Application security requirements can mandate checks for zero denominators and safe arithmetic handling.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive coding patterns that avoid arithmetic exceptions.
Secure coding standards directly require validation to prevent divide-by-zero and similar runtime faults.
Security testing in development can detect divide-by-zero conditions before release.