CVE-2024-24851
Memory Safety in Automationdirect P3-550E Firmware 1.2.10.9 … 4.1.1.10
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-24851 is a high-severity Buffer Access with Incorrect Length Value (CWE-805) vulnerability in Automationdirect P3-550E Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 30% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-22214
Vulnerability Data
A heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Programming Software Connection FiBurn functionality of AutomationDirect P3-550E 1.2.10.9. A specially crafted network packet can lead to a buffer overflow. An attacker can send an unauthenticated packet to trigger this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
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.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent incorrect-length buffer operations via safe APIs, reviews, and testing.
Vulnerability identification can discover buffer-length flaws but does not prevent their introduction.
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 can detect out-of-bounds accesses, but does not guarantee prevention.
Secure development life cycle mandates buffer-safety practices that directly prevent incorrect length values.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size validation, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles encourage bounds-checked APIs, yet leave concrete coding decisions to developers.
Secure coding explicitly requires correct buffer-length handling, eliminating CWE-805 when followed.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.