CVE-2024-39590VulnerabilityPublished 18 Sep 2024Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-39590: OpenPLC_v3 · Incorrect Type Conversion or Cast

Affects OpenPLC_v3Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 1.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 63% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
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: 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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 Sep 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

1. Apply patches or updates from the OpenPLC project as soon as they become available to address the pointer dereference issues. 2. Until patches are released, implement strict network segmentation to isolate OpenPLC systems from untrusted networks, limiting access to EtherNet/IP ports only to trusted devices. 3. Deploy network-level filtering and intrusion detection systems to monitor and block malformed or suspicious EtherNet/IP traffic targeting OpenPLC devices. 4. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on industrial protocol implementations to identify similar vulnerabilities. 5. Enforce strict access controls and minimize exposure of OpenPLC runtime services to the internet or large internal networks. 6. Maintain up-to-date inventories of OpenPLC deployments and versions to prioritize remediation efforts. 7. Educate operational technology (OT) staff on the risks of malformed protocol messages and encourage monitoring for unusual system crashes or network traffic patterns. 8. Consider implementing application-layer firewalls or protocol-aware gateways that can validate EtherNet/IP message integrity before forwarding to OpenPLC devices.

Description

Multiple invalid pointer dereference vulnerabilities exist in the OpenPLC Runtime EtherNet/IP parser functionality of OpenPLC_v3 16bf8bac1a36d95b73e7b8722d0edb8b9c5bb56a. A specially crafted EtherNet/IP request can lead to denial of service. An attacker can send a series of EtherNet/IP requests to trigger these vulnerabilities.This instance of the vulnerability occurs within the `Protected_Logical_Write_Reply` function

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-39590 is denial of service, which can disrupt industrial control processes managed by OpenPLC. For European organizations, especially those in manufacturing, energy, utilities, and critical infrastructure sectors that rely on OpenPLC for automation, this can lead to operational downtime, safety risks, and financial losses. The vulnerability does not compromise data confidentiality or integrity but affects system availability, which is critical in industrial environments. Disruption of control systems can halt production lines or cause unsafe conditions if safety interlocks or monitoring systems fail. Given the network-exploitable nature without authentication, attackers could target exposed OpenPLC instances remotely, increasing the risk of widespread disruption. The lack of known exploits currently limits immediate risk, but the potential for future exploitation remains. Organizations with insufficient network segmentation or exposure of EtherNet/IP services to untrusted networks are at higher risk. The impact is amplified in sectors with stringent uptime requirements and regulatory compliance obligations, such as energy grids and manufacturing plants.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2025, 17:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-704

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats