CVE-2024-21953VulnerabilityPublished 10 Feb 2026

CVE-2024-21953: AMD EPYC™ 9004 Series Processors · Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input

Affects AMD EPYC™ 9004 Series ProcessorsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: High
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system 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 through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the Subsequent System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Subsequent System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Feb 2026
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 2026-10-25.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
AMDAMD EPYC™ 9004 Series Processors	Affected–	Fixed in–
AMDAMD EPYC™ 8004 Series Processors	Affected–	Fixed in–
AMDAMD EPYC™ Embedded 9004 Series Processors	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should implement strict access controls and monitoring on hypervisor management interfaces to prevent unauthorized privilege escalation. Employ hardware-based security features such as AMD’s Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) to add layers of protection for guest VMs. Regularly audit and monitor IOMMU configurations and hypervisor logs for anomalous changes that could indicate exploitation attempts. Limit the number of administrators with hypervisor-level privileges and enforce multi-factor authentication to reduce insider threat risks. Stay informed on AMD’s security advisories and apply firmware or microcode updates promptly once patches become available. Consider network segmentation and isolation of critical virtual machines to limit the impact of any compromise. Additionally, conduct regular integrity checks on guest VM data and backups to detect and recover from potential corruption. Collaborate with cloud service providers to ensure they have addressed this vulnerability in their infrastructure if using third-party cloud environments.

Description

Improper input validation in IOMMU could allow a malicious hypervisor to reconfigure IOMMU registers resulting in loss of guest data integrity.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those operating cloud services, data centers, or virtualized environments using AMD EPYC 9004 Series processors, this vulnerability poses a risk to the integrity of guest virtual machines. Loss of data integrity can lead to corrupted data, application errors, or undetected manipulation of critical workloads. This could affect financial institutions, healthcare providers, and government agencies relying on virtualized infrastructure for sensitive data processing. While confidentiality and availability are not directly impacted, the integrity compromise can undermine trust in system outputs and potentially lead to compliance issues under regulations such as GDPR if data accuracy is affected. The requirement for a malicious hypervisor with high privileges limits the attack surface to insiders or attackers who have already gained significant control over the host system. However, given the increasing reliance on virtualization in European IT infrastructure, the potential for damage is non-trivial. Organizations may face operational disruptions and reputational damage if guest data integrity is compromised.

CWE-1284Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product receives input that is expected to specify a quantity (such as size or length), but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the quantity has the required properties.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Feb 2026, 20:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats