CVE-2024-8063
Ollama 0.3.3
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-8063 is a high-severity Divide By Zero (CWE-369) vulnerability in Ollama Ollama. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 45th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as NLP and Transformers; in the Data-Related Vulnerabilities risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — 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-2024-8063, published on 2025-03-20, is a divide by zero vulnerability (CWE-369) affecting ollama/ollama version v0.3.3. The issue arises during the import of GGUF models when a crafted type is specified for the `block_count` parameter in the Modelfile. Processing such a model by the server triggers the vulnerability, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition due to a crash. It carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H).
The vulnerability is exploitable by any unauthenticated remote attacker with network access to the Ollama server. By providing a specially crafted GGUF model via a Modelfile, the attacker can induce a server crash during model import and processing, achieving a denial of service that disrupts availability without impacting confidentiality or integrity.
Advisories and mitigation details are available in the Huntr bounty report at https://huntr.com/bounties/fd8e1ed6-21d2-4c9e-8395-2098f11b7db9.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-6935
Vulnerability Data
A divide by zero vulnerability exists in ollama/ollama version v0.3.3. The vulnerability occurs when importing GGUF models with a crafted type for `block_count` in the Modelfile. This can lead to a denial of service (DoS) condition when the server processes…
more
the model, causing it to crash.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- NLP and Transformers
- Risk Domain
- Data-Related Vulnerabilities
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: ollama
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including static/dynamic analysis) finds divide-by-zero conditions after they have been coded.
Security engineering principles can require safe-arithmetic constructs or explicit guards that keep division operands nonzero.
Validating numeric inputs before use as divisors structurally blocks zero values from reaching division operations.
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 directly include code analysis, input validation, and testing that prevent divide-by-zero errors.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover divide-by-zero flaws via static analysis or testing.
Routine patching and replacement can remediate divide-by-zero bugs present in deployed software.
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 can detect divide-by-zero conditions before release.
Secure development lifecycle includes input validation and error-handling practices that can prevent divide-by-zero faults.
Application security requirements can mandate checks for zero denominators and safe arithmetic handling.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive coding patterns that avoid arithmetic exceptions.
Secure coding standards directly require validation to prevent divide-by-zero and similar runtime faults.