Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-4435

Dfinity Stable Structures ≤ 0.6.0

Published
21 May 2024
Modified
10 December 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0052 41th percentile
Risk Priority 46 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-4435 is a medium-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Dfinity Stable Structures. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

When storing unbounded types in a BTreeMap, a node is represented as a linked list of "memory chunks". It was discovered recently that when we deallocate a node, in some cases only the first memory chunk is deallocated, and the…

more

rest of the memory chunks remain (incorrectly) allocated, causing a memory leak. In the worst case, depending on how a canister uses the BTreeMap, an adversary could interact with the canister through its API and trigger interactions with the map that keep consuming memory due to the memory leak. This could potentially lead to using an excessive amount of memory, or even running out of memory. This issue has been fixed in #212 https://github.com/dfinity/stable-structures/pull/212 by changing the logic for deallocating nodes to ensure that all of a node's memory chunks are deallocated and users are asked to upgrade to version 0.6.4.. Tests have been added to prevent regressions of this nature moving forward. Note: Users of stable-structure < 0.6.0 are not affected. Users who are not storing unbounded types in BTreeMap are not affected and do not need to upgrade. Otherwise, an upgrade to version 0.6.4 is necessary.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
T1499.003 Application Exhaustion Flood Impact
Adversaries may target resource intensive features of applications to cause a denial of service (DoS), denying availability to those applications.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-7884Same vendor: Dfinity
CVE-2026-46102Shared CWE-401
CVE-2026-53227Shared CWE-401
CVE-2025-30658Shared CWE-401
CVE-2025-37874Shared CWE-401
CVE-2025-46686Shared CWE-401
CVE-2023-44193Shared CWE-401
CVE-2023-22395Shared CWE-401
CVE-2023-2618Shared CWE-401
CVE-2024-35930Shared CWE-401

Affected Assets

dfinity
stable structures
≤ 0.6.0

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.

Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.

Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.

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 SDLC practices directly enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.

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.

finds

Security testing in development can detect unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.

finds

Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.

References