CVE-2024-24422
Memory Safety in Linuxfoundation Magma ≤ 1.8.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-24422 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Linuxfoundation Magma. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 45th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2024-24422 is a stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability (CWE-787) in the Linux Foundation's Magma project, affecting versions up to and including 1.8.0. The flaw resides in the decode_protocol_configuration_options function within the file /3gpp/3gpp_24.008_sm_ies.c. It enables attackers to trigger a denial of service (DoS) condition by sending a specially crafted Non-Access Stratum (NAS) packet. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H), indicating high severity due to its potential for significant availability disruption.
Any unauthenticated attacker with network access to a vulnerable Magma deployment can exploit this issue, as it requires no privileges or user interaction and has low attack complexity. By transmitting a malicious NAS packet, the attacker causes a stack overflow, leading to application crashes or service unavailability, effectively denying service to legitimate users of the affected cellular network infrastructure.
The vulnerability is fixed in Magma version 1.9 via commit 08472ba98b8321f802e95f5622fa90fec2dea486. Security practitioners should update to this version or later and review the advisory at https://cellularsecurity.org/ransacked for additional details on mitigation and verification steps.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-21841
Vulnerability Data
The Linux Foundation Magma <= 1.8.0 (fixed in v1.9 commit 08472ba98b8321f802e95f5622fa90fec2dea486) was discovered to contain a stack overflow in the decode_protocol_configuration_options function at /3gpp/3gpp_24.008_sm_ies.c. This vulnerability allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via a crafted NAS packet.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Input validation can structurally reject or sanitize data that would otherwise trigger an out-of-bounds write.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
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-development practices (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software directly eliminates known instances of this coding weakness.
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.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.
Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.
Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.