CVE-2024-0607VulnerabilityPublished 18 Jan 2024Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-0607: Improper Handling of Values

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.6 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.6Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 17% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Jan 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-0607, organizations should prioritize applying kernel patches from trusted Linux distribution vendors as soon as they become available. Until patches are deployed, restrict local user access to trusted personnel only and enforce strict user privilege management to minimize the risk of exploitation. Monitoring system logs for kernel crashes or Netfilter errors can help detect attempts to exploit this vulnerability. Employing kernel hardening techniques such as SELinux or AppArmor may reduce the impact of local exploits. Network segmentation and limiting administrative access to critical Linux systems can further reduce exposure. Additionally, organizations should maintain up-to-date backups and recovery plans to quickly restore service in case of disruption. Security teams should stay informed of vendor advisories and coordinate with IT operations to ensure timely patch management. Testing patches in staging environments before production deployment is recommended to avoid unintended disruptions.

Description

A flaw was found in the Netfilter subsystem in the Linux kernel. The issue is in the nft_byteorder_eval() function, where the code iterates through a loop and writes to the `dst` array. On each iteration, 8 bytes are written, but `dst` is an array of u32, so each element only has space for 4 bytes. That means every iteration overwrites part of the previous element corrupting this array of u32. This flaw allows a local user to cause a denial of service or potentially break NetFilter functionality.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-0607 is the potential for denial of service (DoS) on affected Linux systems. By corrupting the Netfilter subsystem's internal data structures, an attacker with local access can cause kernel instability or crashes, leading to network filtering failures or system reboots. This can disrupt firewall protections, allowing malicious traffic to pass unchecked or causing network outages. The integrity of Netfilter rules may also be compromised, potentially allowing unauthorized network activity. While the vulnerability does not directly allow privilege escalation or remote code execution, the loss of availability and network security controls can have significant operational consequences. Organizations relying on Linux-based firewalls, routers, or security appliances are at risk of service disruption. The requirement for local access limits the attack surface but insider threats or compromised user accounts could exploit this flaw. The widespread use of Linux in enterprise, cloud, and critical infrastructure environments means the impact could be broad if exploited.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…