Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-31950

Memory Safety in Frrouting ≤ 9.1

Published
07 April 2024
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0051 41th percentile
Risk Priority 51 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-31950 is a medium-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Frrouting Frrouting. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 41th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In FRRouting (FRR) through 9.1, there can be a buffer overflow and daemon crash in ospf_te_parse_ri for OSPF LSA packets during an attempt to read Segment Routing subTLVs (their size is not validated).

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-31951Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2024-31948Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2026-28532Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2026-37457Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2026-37458Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2023-46753Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2023-41361Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2023-38406Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2025-61104Same product: Frrouting Frrouting
CVE-2025-61101Same product: Frrouting Frrouting

Affected Assets

frrouting
frrouting
≤ 9.1

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)
  • V5.2.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.

Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.

Engineering principles require bounds checking and safe buffer handling in design.

Memory protection limits the impact of an overflow once it occurs.

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 development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.

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.

prevents

Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.

finds

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.

References