VulnerabilityPublished 31 Jan 2024Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-23170: Mbed TLS · Covert Timing Channel

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium · fixed in 3.5.2 : update affected systems when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.5.2, 2.28.7

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

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

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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 31 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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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

Upgrade all Mbed TLS deployments to version 2.28.7 or later for 2.x branches, and 3.5.2 or later for 3.x branches to apply the fix for this timing side-channel vulnerability.
Restrict local access to systems performing RSA private key operations to trusted personnel only, minimizing the risk of local attackers exploiting this flaw.
Implement strict monitoring and logging of decryption request patterns to detect abnormal volumes that could indicate an ongoing timing attack.
Employ hardware security modules (HSMs) or cryptographic accelerators that provide side-channel resistant implementations of RSA operations where feasible.
Conduct regular security audits and penetration tests focusing on local privilege escalation and side-channel attack vectors.
For multi-tenant or shared environments, enforce strong isolation controls to prevent unauthorized local access to cryptographic services.
Educate system administrators and security teams about the nature of timing side-channel attacks and the importance of patching cryptographic libraries promptly.
Review and update incident response plans to include detection and mitigation strategies for side-channel attacks.

Description

An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 2.x before 2.28.7 and 3.x before 3.5.2. There was a timing side channel in RSA private operations. This side channel could be sufficient for a local attacker to recover the plaintext. It requires the attacker to send a large number of messages for decryption, as described in "Everlasting ROBOT: the Marvin Attack" by Hubert Kario.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2024-23170 is the potential compromise of confidentiality in cryptographic operations that rely on vulnerable Mbed TLS RSA implementations. This could lead to exposure of sensitive plaintext data, including encrypted communications, authentication tokens, or other protected information. The requirement for local access limits the risk to insiders or attackers who have already breached perimeter defenses, but it raises concerns for environments with shared access or multi-tenant systems. Industries relying heavily on embedded systems, IoT devices, or network appliances using Mbed TLS for secure communications could see increased risk. The attack does not affect data integrity or availability, but the confidentiality breach could undermine trust in cryptographic protections and compliance with data protection regulations such as GDPR. Organizations may face reputational damage and regulatory scrutiny if sensitive data is exposed due to this vulnerability. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate urgency but does not eliminate the risk, especially as the attack technique requires extensive message exchanges which may be detectable with proper monitoring.

CWE-385Covert Timing Channel (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
Covert timing channels convey information by modulating some aspect of system behavior over time, so that the program receiving the information can observe system behavior and infer protected information.
Architecture and Design
Whenever possible, specify implementation strategies that do not introduce time variances in operations.
Implementation
Often one can artificially manipulate the time which operations take or -- when operations occur -- can remove information from the attacker.
Implementation
It is reasonable to add artificial or random delays so that the amount of CPU time consumed is independent of the action being taken by the application.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V6.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross-Domain Search Timing (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2025, 21:43 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-385

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats