VulnerabilityPublished 4 Sep 2024Updated 5 Sep 2024

CVE-2024-45692: Infinite Loop

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High · fixed in 7.20.2 : patch affected systems soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 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 49% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.20.2, 2.202

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 4 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 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

If you cannot patch yet, network-level mitigations can help reduce risk: implement ingress and egress filtering to block spoofed UDP packets targeting port 10000, using firewall rules or network ACLs. Rate limiting UDP traffic on port 10000 can help mitigate potential traffic loops. Monitoring network traffic for unusual spikes or loops involving port 10000 can provide early detection of exploitation attempts. Restrict access to port 10000 to trusted IP addresses or VPNs where possible, minimizing exposure to untrusted networks. Employ network segmentation to isolate management interfaces from general network traffic. Regularly review and update firewall and IDS/IPS signatures to detect and block suspicious UDP traffic patterns. Finally, maintain awareness of vendor advisories and apply patches promptly once available to fully remediate the vulnerability.

Description

Webmin before 2.202 and Virtualmin before 7.20.2 allow a network traffic loop via spoofed UDP packets on port 10000.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-45692 is a denial-of-service condition caused by a network traffic loop, which can severely degrade or completely disrupt the availability of Webmin and Virtualmin services. Organizations relying on these tools for server and hosting management may experience outages, affecting administrative access and potentially impacting hosted applications and services. The network saturation caused by the loop can also affect other systems sharing the same network infrastructure, leading to broader service degradation. Since the vulnerability does not affect confidentiality or integrity, data breaches or unauthorized modifications are not expected. However, the disruption of administrative tools can delay incident response and recovery efforts during attacks. The ease of exploitation without authentication or user interaction increases the risk of automated attacks or large-scale exploitation attempts. This can be particularly damaging for managed service providers, web hosting companies, and enterprises with critical infrastructure managed via these tools. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as exploit code may emerge following public disclosure.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 07:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-835

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats