Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-55627 is a medium-severity Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-122) vulnerability in Oisf Suricata. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 40% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2024-55627 is a buffer overflow vulnerability in Suricata, an open-source network Intrusion Detection System (IDS), Intrusion Prevention System (IPS), and Network Security Monitoring (NSM) engine. Affecting versions prior to 7.0.8, the flaw occurs when processing a specially crafted TCP stream during buffer initialization with memset, triggered by an unsigned integer underflow that leads to a very large buffer overflow while zero-filling. This issue maps to CWEs-122 (Heap-based Buffer Overflow), CWE-191 (Integer Underflow), and CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write), with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.9 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H).
A remote, unauthenticated attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending a maliciously crafted TCP stream to a vulnerable Suricata instance. The high attack complexity (AC:H) stems from the need to precisely manipulate the TCP stream to induce the underflow. Successful exploitation results in a denial-of-service condition, as the buffer overflow causes the Suricata process to crash, disrupting network monitoring, detection, and prevention capabilities without impacting confidentiality or integrity.
The vulnerability has been fully addressed in Suricata version 7.0.8 through multiple fixes detailed in GitHub commits (282509f70c4ce805098e59535af445362e3e9ebd, 8900041405dbb5f9584edae994af2100733fb4be, and 9a53ec43b13f0039a083950511a18bf6f408e432), as documented in the GitHub Security Advisory GHSA-h2mv-7gg8-8x7v and Redmine issue 7393. Security practitioners should prioritize upgrading to Suricata 7.0.8 or later to mitigate the risk.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-52825
Vulnerability Data
Suricata is a network Intrusion Detection System, Intrusion Prevention System and Network Security Monitoring engine. Prior to 7.0.8, a specially crafted TCP stream can lead to a very large buffer overflow while being zero-filled during initialization with memset due to…
more
an unsigned integer underflow. The issue has been addressed in Suricata 7.0.8.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and memory-error detectors) can discover heap overflows after they have been coded.
Input validation enforces bounds checking on data written to heap buffers, directly stopping the overflow condition from being introduced.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Security engineering principles require use of memory-safe constructs and bounds-checked allocation routines that avoid introducing heap overflows.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability of a heap overflow to execute attacker-controlled code or corrupt adjacent structures.
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-development practices directly require bounds checking and safe memory handling that prevent heap overflows.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover heap-overflow flaws but does not prevent their introduction in code.
Timely patching removes known heap-overflow instances after they exist.
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 heap overflows before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates practices that reduce the likelihood of introducing heap overflows.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory APIs that mitigate heap overflows.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safety and input-validation controls that address heap overflows.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe techniques (safe functions, bounds checks) that prevent heap-based buffer overflows.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.