VulnerabilityPublished 6 Dec 2024Updated 11 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-44852: Release of Invalid Pointer or Reference

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% 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 6 Dec 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

Network Segmentation and Access Controls: Restrict network access to ROS2 navigation2 components by implementing strict firewall rules, VPNs, or isolated network segments to prevent unauthorized remote access.
Monitoring and Logging: Deploy monitoring solutions to detect abnormal crashes or segmentation faults in ROS2 navigation2 processes, enabling rapid incident response.
Input Validation and Fuzz Testing: Conduct thorough input validation and fuzz testing on navigation2 inputs to identify and mitigate malformed data that could trigger the vulnerability.
Disable or Limit Exposure: Where feasible, disable the vulnerable theta_star::ThetaStar::isUnsafeToPlan() functionality or limit its use until a patch is available.
Update and Patch Management: Stay informed about official patches or updates from the ROS2 maintainers and apply them promptly once released.
Incident Response Planning: Prepare incident response procedures specific to robotic system failures to minimize downtime and safety risks.
Vendor Coordination: Engage with ROS2 vendors or maintainers for guidance and potential workarounds.
Environment Hardening: Employ containerization or sandboxing techniques to isolate ROS2 navigation2 processes, reducing the blast radius of crashes. These measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on network-level protections, proactive detection, and operational continuity in robotic environments.

Description

Open Robotics Robotic Operating System 2 ROS2 navigation2 v.humble was discovered to contain a segmentation violation via the component theta_star::ThetaStar::isUnsafeToPlan().

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-44852 is a denial-of-service condition caused by a segmentation fault in the ROS2 navigation2 component. Organizations deploying ROS2 in robotics, automation, or autonomous systems may experience unexpected crashes of navigation software, leading to operational downtime, loss of robotic functionality, and potential safety hazards if robots fail to navigate correctly. This can disrupt manufacturing lines, autonomous vehicle operations, or research activities relying on ROS2. Since the vulnerability can be exploited remotely without authentication or user interaction, attackers could target exposed ROS2 navigation2 services to cause widespread disruption. Although confidentiality and integrity are not affected, the availability impact is critical in environments where continuous robotic operation is essential. The lack of patches and known exploits increases the urgency for proactive mitigation. Industries such as manufacturing, logistics, defense, and research institutions using ROS2 are particularly vulnerable. The disruption could also lead to financial losses, safety incidents, and reputational damage for organizations relying on affected robotic systems.

CWE-763Release of Invalid Pointer or Reference (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product attempts to return a memory resource to the system, but it calls the wrong release function or calls the appropriate release function incorrectly.
Implementation
Only call matching memory management functions. Do not mix and match routines. For example, when you allocate a buffer with malloc(), dispose of the original pointer with free().
Implementation
When programming in C++, consider using smart pointers provided by the boost library to help correctly and consistently manage memory.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
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 28 Feb 2026, 06:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-763

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats