VulnerabilityPublished 30 Sep 2024

CVE-2024-45200: kartlanpwn · Code Injection

Affects kartlanpwnSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium : upgrade to 3.0.3 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 1.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 72% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.0.3

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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: 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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 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 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

Upgrade latte-soft/kartlanpwn to 3.0.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHublatte-soft/kartlanpwn`pkg:github/latte-soft/kartlanpwn`Other threats	Affected <3.0.3	Fixed in 3.0.3

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-45200, affected users should update Mario Kart 8 Deluxe to version 3.0.3 or later as soon as the patch becomes available from Nintendo. Until patched, users should avoid opening the Wireless Play or LAN Play menus in untrusted or public LAN environments to reduce exposure. Network administrators in environments with Nintendo Switch consoles should segment and isolate gaming devices on separate VLANs or subnets to limit LAN-based attack vectors. Employing network monitoring to detect anomalous or malformed browse-reply packets targeting Switch consoles can provide early warning of exploitation attempts. Additionally, Nintendo should review and improve input validation and memory safety in the Pia library and related multiplayer code to prevent similar deserialization vulnerabilities. Users should also disable local multiplayer features if not needed. For event organizers, ensuring consoles are updated and restricting network access during tournaments can reduce risk. Finally, educating users about the risks of local network attacks and encouraging cautious use of multiplayer menus can help mitigate exploitation.

Description

In Nintendo Mario Kart 8 Deluxe before 3.0.3, the LAN/LDN local multiplayer implementation allows a remote attacker to exploit a stack-based buffer overflow upon deserialization of session information via a malformed browse-reply packet, aka KartLANPwn. The victim is not required to join a game session with an attacker. The victim must open the "Wireless Play" (or "LAN Play") menu from the game's title screen, and an attacker nearby (LDN) or on the same LAN network as the victim can send a crafted reply packet to the victim's console. This enables a remote attacker to obtain complete denial-of-service on the game's process, or potentially, remote code execution on the victim's console. The issue is caused by incorrect use of the Nintendo Pia library,

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-45200 is on the availability and integrity of the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe game process on Nintendo Switch consoles. An attacker on the same LAN or physically nearby can cause the game to crash, resulting in denial-of-service and disruption of gameplay. More critically, the buffer overflow could allow remote code execution, which may enable an attacker to execute arbitrary code on the victim’s console. This could lead to unauthorized control over the device, potentially compromising user data, game integrity, or even broader system security depending on the console’s security architecture. Although exploitation requires network proximity and the victim opening the Wireless or LAN Play menu, the lack of need for user interaction beyond that and no privilege requirements lower the barrier to attack. For organizations or individuals using Nintendo Switch consoles in shared environments such as gaming cafes, tournaments, or LAN parties, this vulnerability could be leveraged to disrupt events or compromise devices. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk, but the potential for remote code execution elevates the threat if weaponized. Overall, the impact is significant for affected users but limited in scope to local network environments.

CWE-94Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #10OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
Architecture and Design · Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Architecture and Design
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
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
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
Code 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 26 Feb 2026, 08:09 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-94

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats