CVE-2026-35405 — libp2p-rendezvous
HIGHCVE-2026-35405 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) CWE-770 vulnerability in libp2p-rendezvous. A fix is available for libp2p-rendezvous — see the affected versions and patch details below.
libp2p-rendezvous: Unlimited namespace registrations per peer enables OOM DoS on rendezvous servers
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-35405.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
Where this sits among everything scored
Real-World Exposure
libp2p-rendezvousReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects crates.io packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
found that libp2p-rendezvous server has no limit on how many namespaces a single peer can register. a malicious peer can just keep registering unique namespaces in a loop and the server happily accepts every single one allocating memory for each registration with no pushback. keep doing this long enough (or with multiple sybil peers) and the server process gets OOM killed.
no auth required. any peer on the network can do this.
Details
the bug is in Registrations::add() inside protocols/rendezvous/src/server.rs.
the store uses a BiMap keyed on (PeerId, Namespace) so yes, a peer can't register the same namespace twice. but there's nothing stopping it from registering 10,000 different namespaces. each unique one gets its own entry in:
registrations_for_peer(BiMap)registrations(HashMap)next_expiry(FuturesUnordered a new heap-allocated BoxFuture per registration)
namespace strings are only validated for length (MAX_NAMESPACE = 255), not count. there's no max_registrations_per_peer anywhere in Config or the rest of the codebase.
making it worse MAX_TTL = 72 hours. so every registration just sits there for up to 3 days. disconnecting doesn't clean anything up either, entries only go away when the TTL fires.
protocols/rendezvous/src/server.rs
└── Registrations::add() ← no per-peer count check anywhere
protocols/rendezvous/src/lib.rs
├── MAX_NAMESPACE = 255 ← length capped, count is not
└── MAX_TTL = 72h ← entries persist a long time
fix would be adding something like max_registrations_per_peer to Config and checking it at the top of add() before inserting anything.
PoC
tested on libp2p v0.56.1, built from source.
step 1 - start the rendezvous server (uses the example from the repo):
cargo run --manifest-path examples/rendezvous/Cargo.toml --bin rendezvous-example
step 2 - run the flood client (attached as rzv-flood.rs):
cargo run --manifest-path examples/rendezvous/Cargo.toml --bin rzv-flood
it connects as a single peer and registers 10,000 unique namespaces (flood-00000000 through flood-00009999), chaining each registration on the confirmed Registered event from the previous one.
server accepted every single one. not one rejection.
memory on the server side (via ps aux RSS column):
baseline: ~18 MB
mid flood: ~26 MB
after 10k regs: ~28 MB
that's from one peer. scale to 100 sybil peers doing the same thing and you're looking at ~1GB. 1000 peers and the server is dead.
<img width="1032" height="124" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f778f179-2aa1-4485-940c-25e218733fa8" />server RSS climbing during the flood
<img width="553" height="760" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/691b0f52-dda0-443f-a3c2-98c8c6336f2f" />10,000 registrations confirmed, zero rejected
Impact
any node running libp2p-rendezvous server-side is affected. rendezvous servers are typically well-known, publicly reachable nodes taking one down disrupts peer discovery for all clients depending on it. any rust-libp2p based project that deploys a rendezvous point is at risk.
no special position on the network needed. no crypto work. just open a connection and send REGISTER in a loop.
Researchers
Discovered by:
- Ramesh Adhikari (CoE-CNDS Lab, VJTI, Mumbai, India)
- Dr. Faruk Kazi (CoE-CNDS Lab, VJTI, Mumbai, India)
Organization: Centre of Excellence in Complex & Nonlinear Dynamical Systems (CoE-CNDS Lab), Veermata Jijabai Technological Institute (VJTI), Mumbai, India
We have not disclosed this to any other vendor or made it public. We are reporting directly to the rust-libp2p security team through this advisory.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🦀crates.io | libp2p-rendezvous | all versions | 0.17.1cargo update -p libp2p-rendezvous --precise 0.17.1 |
Affected Products
libp2pprotocolDetection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for libp2p-rendezvous, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update libp2p-rendezvous to 0.17.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-35405 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Cap what an attacker can consume: apply request size, rate and timeout limits in front of the affected component, and run it with memory and CPU limits so exhaustion degrades one worker rather than the whole service.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-35405 in your dependencies?
Find it across crates.io, including transitive dependencies.