CVE-2024-29040VulnerabilityPublished 28 Jun 2024Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-29040: tpm2-tss · Deserialization of Untrusted Data

Affects tpm2-tssSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 4.1.0 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.1.0

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: 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 28 Jun 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 2026-10-25.

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

Upgrade tpm2-software/tpm2-tss to 4.1.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubtpm2-software/tpm2-tss`pkg:github/tpm2-software/tpm2-tss`Other threats	Affected <4.1.0	Fixed in 4.1.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

The primary mitigation is to upgrade all affected tpm2-tss installations to version 4.1.0 or later, where the vulnerability has been patched. Organizations should audit their software supply chain and device firmware to identify any use of vulnerable tpm2-tss versions. Implement strict input validation and sanity checks on all TPM-related deserialization processes to ensure that fields like TPM2_GENERATED magic conform to expected values. Limit local access to TPM-enabled devices through physical security controls and restrict administrative privileges to trusted personnel. Employ monitoring and logging of TPM interactions to detect anomalous or suspicious activity that could indicate exploitation attempts. For environments where upgrading is not immediately feasible, consider isolating vulnerable systems or disabling features that rely on Fapi_Quote and Fapi_VerifyQuote functions if possible. Finally, maintain awareness of updates from the tpm2-software project and apply security patches promptly.

Description

This repository hosts source code implementing the Trusted Computing Group's (TCG) TPM2 Software Stack (TSS). The JSON Quote Info returned by Fapi_Quote has to be deserialized by Fapi_VerifyQuote to the TPM Structure `TPMS_ATTEST`. For the field `TPM2_GENERATED magic` of this structure any number can be used in the JSON structure. The verifier can receive a state which does not represent the actual, possibly malicious state of the device under test. The malicious device might get access to data it shouldn't, or can use services it shouldn't be able to. This issue has been patched in version 4.1.0.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality of sensitive information protected by TPM modules using vulnerable versions of tpm2-tss. Since TPMs are widely used for hardware-based security functions such as secure boot, disk encryption key protection, and platform attestation, exploitation could allow a malicious device or insider to bypass security assurances, potentially exposing cryptographic keys or sensitive attestation data. This could undermine trust in device integrity and compromise secure authentication or encryption processes. Although the attack requires local access, environments with shared or less controlled physical access, such as manufacturing, repair centers, or multi-tenant data centers, may be more vulnerable. The vulnerability does not affect integrity or availability, so it is less likely to cause system outages or data tampering. However, the confidentiality breach could lead to further attacks or data leaks. European organizations relying on TPM-based security for compliance with regulations like GDPR or NIS2 should prioritize addressing this vulnerability to maintain data protection standards.

CWE-502Deserialization of Untrusted Data (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #15OWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
Implementation
When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe.
Implementation
Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Object Injection (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 4 Nov 2025, 17:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-502

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats