Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-0316

Fireeye Endpoint Security 5.2.0.958244

Published
15 January 2024
Modified
21 November 2024
CVSS Score v3.1 6.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0032 24th percentile
Risk Priority 51 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-0316 is a medium-severity Improper Cleanup on Thrown Exception (CWE-460) vulnerability in Fireeye Endpoint Security. Its CVSS base score is 6.8 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 24th 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 SC-24 (Fail in Known State) and SI-17 (Fail-safe Procedures) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A10:2025 Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper cleanup vulnerability in exceptions thrown in FireEye Endpoint Security, affecting version 5.2.0.958244. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to send multiple request packets to the containment_notify/preview parameter, which could lead to a service outage.

CWE(s)
CWE-460

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-0315Same vendor: Fireeye
CVE-2024-0319Same vendor: Fireeye
CVE-2024-0318Same vendor: Fireeye
CVE-2024-0317Same vendor: Fireeye
CVE-2024-0320Same vendor: Fireeye
CVE-2024-0314Same vendor: Fireeye
CVE-2025-59399Shared CWE-460
CVE-2024-20354Shared CWE-460
CVE-2025-69652Shared CWE-460
CVE-2025-30157Shared CWE-460

Affected Assets

fireeye
endpoint security
5.2.0.958244

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SC-24 Fail in Known State good match

Requires the system to fail to a known state on indicated failures, directly forcing proper state cleanup instead of leaving inconsistent state after an exception.

SI-17 Fail-safe Procedures good match

Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures on failures, which structurally enforces cleanup actions that the weakness omits.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Requires application of security engineering principles (e.g., fail-safe, complete mediation) during design that would eliminate improper exception cleanup.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly enforce proper exception handling and resource cleanup.

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing can detect missing cleanup paths, thereby mitigating the weakness before deployment.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling and cleanup practices that reduce improper state after thrown exceptions.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements can specify robust exception handling and resource-release rules.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture principles include designing for safe failure and guaranteed cleanup on exceptions.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards directly require proper resource release and state restoration after exceptions.

References