Summary
Russh: Unbounded memory exhaustion via CHANNEL_OPEN flood during a client-stalled rekey
A russh server can be driven to unbounded heap growth (process OOM / kill) by
a peer that speaks only standard SSH messages, in the default configuration.
The peer starts a key re-exchange (sends SSH_MSG_KEXINIT) but never sends the
follow-up SSH_MSG_KEX_ECDH_INIT, leaving the server's kex state machine inSessionKexState::InProgress indefinitely. While a rekey is in progress the
server's three message-drain paths are all gated off (if !self.kex.active()),
but the network-read path stays active, so every SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_OPEN the peer
sends is processed inline and appends one reply to an unbounded internal
queue (priority_receiver, an UnboundedReceiver) that is not dequeued until
the rekey completes. Because the peer decides whether the rekey ever completes,
the queue, and the server's memory, grows without bound.
This is reproducible end-to-end against a real russh server over a real
encrypted transport; see "Proof of concept". A one-line negative control (same
flood, no rekey) keeps memory flat, isolating the rekey window as the sole
trigger.
Affected component
russh/src/server/session.rs,Session::runtokio::select!loop. The
network-read arm is ungated; the three drain paths are gated on!self.kex.active().russh/src/server/mod.rs,reply()routes a non-kex message received during
a rekey straight toserver_read_encrypted(inline processing).russh/src/lib_inner.rs,ChannelOpenHandleInner'saccept/reject/Drop
allsenda reply on anUnboundedSender.
Verified on v0.63.1 (commit d3ae702), which is the latest release. The
gating logic predates it.
Details
Session::run (russh/src/server/session.rs:631) drives a tokio::select!
(:713). Three of its message-drain sites are gated on !self.kex.active():
- the pre-
select!batch drain ofpriority_receiver/receiver
(session.rs:680), - the
priority_receiver.recv()arm (session.rs:762), - the
receiver.recv()arm (session.rs:770, which also holds the only otherpriority_receiverdrain at:777).
The fourth arm, r = &mut reading (session.rs:714), is ungated: it reads
and processes one incoming packet every loop iteration regardless of rekey
state, calling reply() (server/mod.rs:1128).
During a rekey, session.common.encrypted.is_some(), so the strict-kex
message-ordering guard (server/mod.rs:1143, which is additionally gated onencrypted.is_none()) does not apply. A non-kex message therefore falls
through reply() to session.server_read_encrypted(handler, pkt)
(server/mod.rs:1232) and is handled inline. For SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_OPEN this
reaches the channel-open handling, which hands the application aChannelOpenHandle.
Whether the handler accepts or (the trait default) rejects, the handle'saccept / reject / Drop all send a Msg::ChannelOpenReply on anUnboundedSender (russh/src/lib_inner.rs:560-603; Drop sendsAdministrativelyProhibited at :594-603). That sender feedspriority_receiver, declared UnboundedReceiver<Msg> (session.rs:23) and
created with tokio::sync::mpsc::unbounded_channel() (session.rs:1522). Its
only drain sites are the three arms gated off during the rekey. So eachCHANNEL_OPEN processed during the rekey window appends one reply (carrying aPendingChannelOpen = channel params + mpsc ChannelRef + ids, a few KB
retained in practice) to a queue that is never dequeued.
Two facts make this unbounded and remote:
- The server enters
InProgressthe moment it receives the peer'sKEXINIT
(server/mod.rs:1153-1158,begin_rekey) and only leaves it upon receiving
the peer'sKEX_ECDH_INIT. The peer decides whether to ever send that,
so the window is attacker-held. - There is no per-connection cap on channels or on the priority queue, and the
sender is unbounded (no backpressure).
Root cause
The intended design was to buffer packets received during a rekey and replay
them afterwards: the fields pending_reads: Vec<Vec<u8>> and pending_len: u32
(session.rs:26-27) exist and are drained at kex completion
(server/mod.rs:1194-1198). But nothing ever pushes to pending_reads or
increments pending_len (they are dead, confirmed by grep acrossrussh/src/). Instead of being buffered, channel messages received during a
rekey are processed inline, and their replies pile up in the unboundedpriority_receiver. The missing piece is a bound on, or bounded deferral of ,
channel processing while kex.active().
Proof of concept
Everything runs inside a container; nothing touches the host.
Lab. poc/Dockerfile builds russh-lab:head from Eugeny/russh @ d3ae702
(v0.63.1), default features (rust 1.91). A raw-SSH-client PoC
(poc/poc_rekey_dos.rs) implements curve25519-sha256 / ssh-ed25519 /
aes256-ctr / hmac-sha2-256 by hand, completes the handshake and a publickey
auth, then:
- sends
SSH_MSG_KEXINIT(server enterskex.active()), - never sends
KEX_ECDH_INIT(rekey stalls, attacker-held), - floods
SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_OPEN.
A minimal server (poc/poc_server.rs) uses the trait-defaultchannel_open_session (which rejects by dropping the handle), so the measured
growth is purely the undrained priority queue, not accepted-channel state.
poc/run.sh runs the attack leg and an identical negative control with no
rekey. Fresh run inside the lab, N = 800,000 opens
(results/rerun-2026-08-29.log):
=== ATTACK (rekey stall) === (poc_server baseline_RSS=4208KB, N=800000)
t=2s server_RSS=667760KB
t=4s server_RSS=1599600KB
t=6s server_RSS=2556016KB
t=8s server_RSS=2566256KB (flood done; memory retained)
=== CONTROL (no rekey) === (poc_server baseline_RSS=4208KB, N=800000)
t=2s..t=12s server_RSS=4208KB (flat throughout)
- ATTACK: RSS
4,208 KB → 2,566,256 KB(~2.57 GB) and retained after the
flood ends, ~3.3 KB perCHANNEL_OPEN, attacker-driven. (An earlier canonical
run reached 2.7 GB at 800k opens, and past 4.8 GB against the stockechoserverexample at 1.5 M opens, seeresults/canonical-run.log.) - CONTROL: RSS flat at
4,208 KB. Without the rekey window the replies are
drained normally; TCP backpressure (the client never reads the failure
replies) even throttles the flood.
The control isolates the rekey window as the sole trigger. Both legs exercise
the real server entry point (Session::run → reply → server_read_encrypted)
over a real encrypted transport.
Reproduce: C=russh-lab N=800000 ./poc/run.sh (see poc/POC-README.md).
Impact
- Availability / DoS. Server RSS climbs at roughly 3.3 KB per
CHANNEL_OPEN, driven entirely by the peer, until the process is OOM-killed.
In the reproduction one connection pushed the server from ~4 MB to 2.57 GB
(and past 4.8 GB against the stockechoserverexample) and it was still
climbing when the flood was stopped. - Reached with standard messages, no special configuration. Any handler is
affected, including one that rejects every channel (the reply enqueued on
rejection is exactly what accumulates). There is no per-connection cap on
in-flight channel opens or on the queue, and the queue's sender has no
backpressure. - The peer keeps the connection alive simply by continuing to send, so the
inactivity timer never fires.
Crafted input forces the application to consume excessive CPU, memory, or other resources, degrading or denying service. Typical impact: denial of service.
CVE-2026-102821 has a CVSS score of 6.5 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.63.2); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
The priority queue carries locally generated channel-open replies, which are
non-kex messages the server must not send during a rekey anyway (RFC 4253
§7.1). So the fix is to bound how much channel work is done during a rekey, not
to drain the queue mid-rekey. Any of:
- (recommended, minimal) cap the number of non-kex messages processed while a
rekey is in progress and disconnect a peer that exceeds it. A stalled/abusive
rekey is then torn down after a small constant instead of growing memory
without bound. Seepatch/rekey-message-cap.patch(a ~10-line change local toSession::run, validated in the lab, the attack leg is disconnected after the
cap and RSS stays flat; a normal rekey, which completes in one round trip, is
unaffected). - bound / deferred-buffer channel messages during a rekey using the existing
(currently dead)pending_reads/pending_lenmachinery, with a hard cap. - bound the number of in-flight channel opens per connection and reject beyond it.
OpenSSH does not service new channels mid-kex; matching that intent closes the
whole family.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-102821? CVE-2026-102821 is a medium-severity uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability in russh (rust), affecting versions <= 0.63.1. It is fixed in 0.63.2. Crafted input forces the application to consume excessive CPU, memory, or other resources, degrading or denying service.
- How severe is CVE-2026-102821? CVE-2026-102821 has a CVSS score of 6.5 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Which versions of russh are affected by CVE-2026-102821? russh (rust) versions <= 0.63.1 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-102821? Yes. CVE-2026-102821 is fixed in 0.63.2. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-102821 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-102821 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-102821 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-102821? Upgrade
russhto 0.63.2 or later.