Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-42491 is a medium-severity Unchecked Return Value (CWE-252) vulnerability in Sangoma Certified Asterisk. Its CVSS base score is 5.7 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 43th 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-39644
Vulnerability Data
Asterisk is an open-source private branch exchange (PBX). Prior to versions 18.24.3, 20.9.3, and 21.4.3 of Asterisk and versions 18.9-cert12 and 20.7-cert2 of certified-asterisk, if Asterisk attempts to send a SIP request to a URI whose host portion starts with…
more
`.1` or `[.1]`, and res_resolver_unbound is loaded, Asterisk will crash with a SEGV. To receive a patch, users should upgrade to one of the following versions: 18.24.3, 20.9.3, 21.4.3, certified-18.9-cert12, certified-20.7-cert2. Two workarounds are available. Disable res_resolver_unbound by setting `noload = res_resolver_unbound.so` in modules.conf, or set `rewrite_contact = yes` on all PJSIP endpoints. NOTE: This may not be appropriate for all Asterisk configurations.
- 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 code evaluation can discover instances where return values are ignored.
Requiring a documented development process and coding standards can mandate explicit checking of all function return values.
Engineering principles can mandate defensive coding such as explicit null checks before dereference.
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 require checking and handling all function return values to detect error conditions.
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 missing return-value checks.
Secure development life cycle mandates verification of return values to prevent undetected failures.
Application security requirements include input/output validation and error handling that covers return-value checks.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require robust error handling and defensive coding practices.
Secure coding explicitly requires checking return values to avoid CWE-252.