CVE-2022-3924
named configured to answer from stale cache may terminate unexpectedly at recursive-clients soft quota
- Published
- Updated
- Reserved
- Assigned by
- isc
Description
This issue can affect BIND 9 resolvers with `stale-answer-enable yes;` that also make use of the option `stale-answer-client-timeout`, configured with a value greater than zero. If the resolver receives many queries that require recursion, there will be a corresponding increase in the number of clients that are waiting for recursion to complete. If there are sufficient clients already waiting when a new client query is received so that it is necessary to SERVFAIL the longest waiting client (see BIND 9 ARM `recursive-clients` limit and soft quota), then it is possible for a race to occur between providing a stale answer to this older client and sending an early timeout SERVFAIL, which may cause an assertion failure. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.12 through 9.16.36, 9.18.0 through 9.18.10, 9.19.0 through 9.19.8, and 9.16.12-S1 through 9.16.36-S1.
Timeline
ID reserved
By isc
- 3 months later
· 3 months later
Published
- 2 years later
· 2 years later
Record updated
Changes after publication (a new score, a public exploit, EPSS crossing 1, 10 or 50 %, leaving KEV) are kept since November 2026; earlier ones are not known.
Scores
| Scored by | CVSS | Score | Vector |
|---|---|---|---|
| iscCNA (assigner) | 3.1 | High7.5 | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H |
| NVDNVD · Modified | 3.1 | High7.5 | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H |
- EPSS (exploitation in 30 days)
- 16.0% · top 3.1% of all CVEs (7 Nov 2026)
- CISA SSVC
- Exploitation: none · Automatable: yes · Technical impact: partial
The list uses the assigner's score when there is one, then CISA's, then NVD's: High 7.5.
Weakness
Affected products
What to do
Solution: Upgrade to the patched release most closely related to your current version of BIND 9: 9.16.37, 9.18.11, 9.19.9, or 9.16.37-S1.
Workaround: Disabling `stale-answer-client-timeout` entirely or setting the timeout value to zero prevents the problem. It is not possible to disable the limit on `recursive-clients`, though it could be set to a very high value in order to reduce the likelihood of encountering this scenario. However, this is not recommended as the limit on recursive clients is important for preventing exhaustion of server resources.
Exploitation: We are not aware of any active exploits.
References (1)
- CVE-2022-3924 (opens in a new tab)vendor-advisoryx_transferred
Sources
The same CVE in the primary databases and aggregators, to check against.
- CVE.org record (opens in a new tab)
- CVE List JSON (GitHub) (opens in a new tab)
- NVD (opens in a new tab)
- FIRST EPSS (opens in a new tab)
- OSV.dev (opens in a new tab)
- GitHub Advisories (opens in a new tab)
- CIRCL Vulnerability-Lookup (opens in a new tab)
Badge for a README or a ticket
[](https://trackcve.app/cve/CVE-2022-3924)Record last updated .