CVE-2025-71417
moderateAuthenticated memory-exhaustion DoS in PocketMine-MP resource pack handling
PocketMine-MP, an open-source Minecraft Bedrock Edition server, did not validate that pack UUIDs listed by a client in ResourcePackClientResponsePacket with STATUS_SEND_PACKS are unique before version 5.32.1. An authenticated player can list the same valid resource pack UUIDs multiple times in a single packet, causing the server to generate and transmit duplicate copies of those packs and consuming server memory. By repeatedly sending such crafted packets, the attacker can exhaust server memory and crash or stall the server, denying service to all connected players. Any operator running PocketMine-MP prior to 5.32.1 is exposed, since the attack requires only ordinary player-level access over the network. No public proof-of-concept or confirmed in-the-wild exploitation is known as of this writing.
What to do: Upgrade PocketMine-MP to version 5.32.1 or later, which validates pack UUID uniqueness. As interim mitigation, limit network access to trusted players since the attack requires an authenticated client, and monitor server memory usage for abnormal growth. Verify the running version from server startup logs before considering the issue closed.
| PMMP (PocketMine-MP project) PocketMine-MP | All versions before 5.32.1 |
Order-of-magnitude estimate by the model from install counts, market share and public scan data it knows; verify before quoting.
PocketMine-MP before 5.32.1 fails to validate uniqueness of pack UUIDs in ResourcePackClientResponsePacket STATUS_SEND_PACKS handling, allowing authenticated clients to trigger duplicate pack transmissions. Attackers can send multiple copies of valid pack UUIDs in a single packet to exhaust server memory and cause denial of service.
- Weakness
- CWE-20
- Vector
- CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
In the news0 stories
No ingested article mentions this CVE yet.