Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-52903

Ibm Db2 12.1.0 – 12.1.1

Published
01 May 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0033 26th percentile
Risk Priority 41 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-52903 is a medium-severity Uncaught Exception (CWE-248) vulnerability in Ibm Db2. 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 26th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) and SC-24 (Fail in Known State) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

IBM Db2 for Linux, UNIX and Windows 12.1.0 and 12.1.1 is vulnerable to a denial of service as the server may crash under certain conditions with a specially crafted query.

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.
T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-0158Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-1992Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2026-11906Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2024-31880Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2023-47701Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2025-36372Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2023-38727Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2023-38740Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2023-38728Same product: Ibm Db2
CVE-2023-30991Same product: Ibm Db2

Affected Assets

ibm
db2
12.1.0 — 12.1.1

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Security engineering principles include robust exception management to keep the system in a defined state.

Fail-in-known-state reduces the impact when an uncaught exception occurs by preserving a safe condition.

Error handling requirements force structured catching and response to exceptions instead of allowing them to propagate uncaught.

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 explicitly require structured exception handling to prevent uncaught exceptions from reaching production.

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 can detect uncaught exceptions before production deployment.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle includes exception-handling standards that reduce uncaught exceptions.

prevents

Application security requirements typically mandate robust error and exception handling.

prevents

Secure architecture principles call for centralized, comprehensive exception management.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require catching and handling exceptions to prevent crashes or leaks.

References