CVE-2024-20354
Cisco Ios Xe 16.12.4a – 17.1.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-20354 is a medium-severity Improper Cleanup on Thrown Exception (CWE-460) vulnerability in Cisco Ios Xe. Its CVSS base score is 4.7 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked at the 20th 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)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-18069
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability in the handling of encrypted wireless frames of Cisco Aironet Access Point (AP) Software could allow an unauthenticated, adjacent attacker to cause a denial of service (DoS) condition on the affected device. This vulnerability is due to incomplete…
more
cleanup of resources when dropping certain malformed frames. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by connecting as a wireless client to an affected AP and sending specific malformed frames over the wireless connection. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause degradation of service to other clients, which could potentially lead to a complete DoS condition.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
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.
Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures on failures, which structurally enforces cleanup actions that the weakness omits.
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.
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.
Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling and cleanup practices that reduce improper state after thrown exceptions.
A.8.26 requires identifying and specifying security requirements (including resilience against attacks like SQL injection) during development or acquisition; it does not itself implement exception handling or cleanup logic that would stop CWE-460 from being exploitable.
A.8.27 mandates establishing and applying secure engineering principles (including secure-by-design, least privilege, fail-securely, and design reviews) but does not itself stop an exception-cleanup defect from being introduced in code or from being exploitable once present; the weakness can still be exploited.