Skip to content
Noroxi
NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

CVE-2025-68137: EVerest's Integer Overflow and Signed to Unsigned conversion lead to either stack buffer overflow or infinite loop

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 33/100)

  • Public proof-of-concept code exists (Exploit-DB); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
  • Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1.3% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 70.7% of all records.
  • Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
  • According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.

Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

EVerest is an EV charging software stack. Prior to version 2025.10.0, an integer overflow occurring in `SdpPacket::parse_header()` allows the current buffer length to be set to 7 after a complete header of size 8 has been read. The remaining length to read is computed using the current length subtracted by the header length which results in a negative value. This value is then interpreted as `SIZE_MAX` (or slightly less) because the expected type of the argument is `size_t`. Depending on whether the server is plain TCP or TLS, this leads to either an infinite loop or a stack buffer overflow. Version 2025.10.0 fixes the issue.

HighCVSS 8.3 · v3.1—Proof of concept No fix recorded
Published
Jan 21, 2026
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
1.3% · 70th percentile

Report tools

JSON

Action score

33

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
33 / 40 · 8.3 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 1.3%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
proof of concept
Automatable
no
Technical impact
total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
—
CNA · GitHub_M
8.4
NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Get told when this record changes

  • Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
  • Proof of concept exists, no weaponized module
  • No fixed version yet

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Follow CVE-2025-68137

When you'll hear from us

  • when it enters CISA KEV
  • when exploit code appears or is weaponized
  • when the record is updated (including a fixed version)
  • when EPSS rises 20 points in a week

One daily email digest (06:00 UTC); connect a webhook for KEV listings and weaponized exploits instantly.

Your free account also gets you

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

  • Stack alerts: add the products and versions you run, get the new CVEs that affect them
  • Uptime monitoring: 1 site, instant email when it goes down
  • Add your domain: subdomains and takeover risk scanned every week (1 domain)
  • 10 scans an hour on the security tools (3 a day without an account), an API key and MCP
  • All your scans in one panel: findings, what changed in the last scan, a report per domain or per client (PDF, share link)
All free tools

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

VendorProduct
linuxfoundationeverest

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • linuxfoundation everestbefore 2025.10.0

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • EVerest everest-core

    • < 2025.10.0affected

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2026-22790EVerest's unchecked SLAC payload length causes stack overflow in HomeplugMessage::setup_payload
    35Monitor
  • CVE-2026-23995EVerest has stack buffer overflow in ifreq.ifr_name when interface name exceeds IFNAMSIZ
    31Monitor
  • CVE-2026-22593EVerest has off-by-one stack buffer overflow in IsoMux certificate filename parsing
    31Monitor

Published before and after this one in the same product

  • ← EarlierCVE-2025-68135Jan 21, 2026 · EVerest's inadequate exception handling leads to denial of service
    26Monitor
  • ← EarlierCVE-2025-68136Jan 21, 2026 · EVerest's inadequate session handling can lead to memory-related errors or exhaustion of the operating system’s file descriptors, resulting in a denial of servi
    29Monitor
  • Later →CVE-2025-68139Jan 21, 2026 · In EVerest, by default, the EV is responsible for closing the connection if the module encounters an error during request processing
    17Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

Proof of concept available

A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.

Evidence

  • Exploit-DB entry ×1

Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.

Public exploit evidence
SourceKindDate
Exploit-DB entrydos2026-09-02

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

  1. Published
  2. First PoC+223 d
  3. TodayNov 7, 2026+290 d
EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Someone on the same network segment can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted

Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
High
Availability impact
High

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

nvd-secondary

Root cause

When data is copied, the source length is not compared with the size of the destination buffer. Excess data overwrites adjacent memory.

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

c
char buf[256];memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);

Fixed

c
char buf[256];if (pkt->len > sizeof(buf)) {  return -EINVAL;}memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

All records