CVE-2024-45809
Memory Safety in Envoyproxy Envoy 1.29.0 – 1.29.9
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-45809 is a medium-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Envoyproxy Envoy. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 30th 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-2024-41614
Vulnerability Data
Envoy is a cloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxy. Jwt filter will lead to an Envoy crash when clear route cache with remote JWKs. In the following case: 1. remote JWKs are used, which requires async header processing; 2. clear_route_cache is enabled…
more
on the provider; 3. header operations are enabled in JWT filter, e.g. header to claims feature; 4. the routing table is configured in a way that the JWT header operations modify requests to not match any route. When these conditions are met, a crash is triggered in the upstream code due to nullptr reference conversion from route(). The root cause is the ordering of continueDecoding and clearRouteCache. This issue has been addressed in versions 1.31.2, 1.30.6, and 1.29.9. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including static analysis) directly finds null-dereference bugs before deployment.
Documented development standards and tools can enforce null-safety rules and safe pointer usage.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Input validation directly enforces bounds checking that stops out-of-bounds reads/writes from being introduced or reached.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
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 catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.