Security Resilience

CVE-2024-0131

Published
02 February 2025
Modified
15 April 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 4.4
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0019 9th percentile
Risk Priority 34 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2024-0131 is a medium-severity Buffer Access with Incorrect Length Value (CWE-805) vulnerability in Custhelp (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 4.4 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 9th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

NVIDIA GPU kernel driver for Windows and Linux contains a vulnerability where a potential user-mode attacker could read  a buffer with an incorrect length. A successful exploit of this vulnerability might lead to denial of service.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1001 Data Obfuscation Command And Control
Adversaries may obfuscate command and control traffic to make it more difficult to detect.
T1003.001 LSASS Memory Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access credential material stored in the process memory of the Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (LSASS).
T1003.005 Cached Domain Credentials Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access cached domain credentials used to allow authentication to occur in the event a domain controller is unavailable.
T1003.006 DCSync Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access credentials and other sensitive information by abusing a Windows Domain Controller's application programming interface (API)(Citation: Microsoft DRSR Dec 2017) (Citation: Microsoft GetNCCChanges) (Citati…
T1008 Fallback Channels Command And Control
Adversaries may use fallback or alternate communication channels if the primary channel is compromised or inaccessible in order to maintain reliable command and control and to avoid data transfer thresholds.
T1012 Query Registry Discovery
Adversaries may interact with the Windows Registry to gather information about the system, configuration, and installed software.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-12549Shared CWE-805
CVE-2025-20169Shared CWE-805
CVE-2026-20033Shared CWE-805
CVE-2025-58774Shared CWE-805
CVE-2025-38743Shared CWE-805
CVE-2024-34476Shared CWE-805
CVE-2025-7048Shared CWE-805
CVE-2025-20202Shared CWE-805
CVE-2026-0716Shared CWE-805
CVE-2025-20170Shared CWE-805

Affected Assets

Custhelp
—
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.4.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and static analysis) directly finds incorrect length values used in sequential buffer accesses.

Secure engineering principles require explicit bounds checking and correct length calculations when performing buffer operations.

Input validation rejects or corrects malformed length values supplied from external sources before they reach buffer operations.

Memory protection mechanisms limit the blast radius when an incorrect length value causes an out-of-bounds access.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

ID.RA-01 partial match
blocks

Vulnerability identification can discover buffer-length flaws but does not prevent their introduction.

PR.PS-06 partial match
blocks

Secure SDLC practices directly prevent incorrect-length buffer operations via safe APIs, reviews, and testing.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

removes
blocks

A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices including secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing (scans/penetration), and developer training that reach buffer-length issues in custom code, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. third-party libraries, legacy code, incomplete enforcement of guidelines, or outsourced development without full assurance).

blocks

Application security requirements can specify buffer-size validation, but do not prescribe implementation details.

blocks

A.8.27 mandates security-by-design, defence-in-depth, least privilege, distrust-external-input, hardening, and design reviews against known attack patterns; these reach a minority slice of CWE-805 (e.g. safe API selection or bounds-aware length computation) but leave most buffer-length errors still introducible and exploitable in the remaining implementation surface.

prevents

Secure coding explicitly requires correct buffer-length handling, eliminating CWE-805 when followed.

References