CVE-2024-45810
Memory Safety in Envoyproxy Envoy ≤ 1.28.7
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-45810 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 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 47th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-41615
Vulnerability Data
Envoy is a cloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxy. Envoy will crash when the http async client is handling `sendLocalReply` under some circumstance, e.g., websocket upgrade, and requests mirroring. The http async client will crash during the `sendLocalReply()` in http async client,…
more
one reason is http async client is duplicating the status code, another one is the destroy of router is called at the destructor of the async stream, while the stream is deferred deleted at first. There will be problems that the stream decoder is destroyed but its reference is called in `router.onDestroy()`, causing segment fault. This will impact ext_authz if the `upgrade` and `connection` header are allowed, and request mirrorring. This issue has been addressed in versions 1.31.2, 1.30.6, 1.29.9, and 1.28.7. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
CVE-2024-45810 enables remote low-privilege attackers to crash Envoy proxy via crafted HTTP requests (e.g., WebSocket upgrades with ext_authz and mirroring enabled), causing a segfault and denial of service, directly facilitating T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation.
MITRE ATLAS TechniquesAI
MITRE ATLAS techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.
Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.
Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.
Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.
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.