Skip to content

quic-go: Panic occurs when queuing undecryptable packets after handshake completion

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Oct 10, 2025 in quic-go/quic-go • Updated Oct 13, 2025

Package

gomod github.com/quic-go/quic-go (Go)

Affected versions

< 0.49.1
>= 0.50.0, < 0.54.1

Patched versions

0.49.1
0.54.1

Description

Summary

A misbehaving or malicious server can trigger an assertion in a quic-go client (and crash the process) by sending a premature HANDSHAKE_DONE frame during the handshake.

Impact

A misbehaving or malicious server can cause a denial-of-service (DoS) attack on the quic-go client by triggering an assertion failure, leading to a process crash. This requires no authentication and can be exploited during the handshake phase. Observed in the wild with certain server implementations (e.g. Solana's Firedancer QUIC).

Affected Versions

  • All versions prior to v0.49.1 (for the 0.49 branch)
  • Versions v0.50.0 to v0.54.0 (inclusive)
  • Fixed in v0.49.1, v0.54.1, and v0.55.0 onward

Users are recommended to upgrade to the latest patched version in their respective maintenance branch or to v0.55.0 or later.

Details

For a regular 1-RTT handshake, QUIC uses three sets of keys to encrypt / decrypt QUIC packets:

  • Initial keys (derived from a static key and the connection ID)
  • Handshake keys (derived from the client's and server's key shares in the TLS handshake)
  • 1-RTT keys (derived when the TLS handshake finishes)

On the client side, Initial keys are discarded when the first Handshake packet is sent. Handshake keys are discarded when the server's HANDSHAKE_DONE frame is received, as specified in section 4.9.2 of RFC 9001. Crucially, Initial keys are always dropped before Handshake keys in a standard handshake.

Due to packet reordering, it is possible to receive a packet with a higher encryption level before the key for that encryption level has been derived. For example, the server's Handshake packets (containing, among others, the TLS certificate) might arrive before the server's Initial packet (which contains the TLS ServerHello). In that case, the client queues the Handshake packets and decrypts them as soon as it has processed the ServerHello and derived Handshake keys.

After completion of the handshake, Initial and Handshake packets are not needed anymore and will be dropped. quic-go implements an assertion that no packets are queued after completion of the handshake.

A misbehaving or malicious server can trigger this assertion, and thereby cause a panic, by sending a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame before actually completing the handshake. In that case, Handshake keys would be dropped before Initial keys.

This can only happen if the server implementation is misbehaving: the server can only complete the handshake after receiving the client's TLS Finished message (which is sent in Handshake packets).

The Fix

quic-go needs to be able to handle misbehaving server implementations, including those that prematurely send a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame. We now discard Initial keys when receiving a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame, thereby correctly handling premature HANDSHAKE_DONE frames. The fix was implemented in quic-go/quic-go#5354.

References

@marten-seemann marten-seemann published to quic-go/quic-go Oct 10, 2025
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Oct 10, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Oct 10, 2025
Reviewed Oct 10, 2025
Last updated Oct 13, 2025

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(20th percentile)

Weaknesses

Reachable Assertion

The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary. Learn more on MITRE.

Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions

The product does not handle or incorrectly handles an exceptional condition. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2025-59530

GHSA ID

GHSA-47m2-4cr7-mhcw

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.