VulnerabilityPublished 22 Nov 2024Updated 13 Jan 2025

CVE-2024-51073

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.7 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.7Medium

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.

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

Attack Vector: Physical
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: High

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

Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable component. Physical interaction may be brief or persistent.
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: 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: 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 22 Nov 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

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should first verify the applicability of the findings within real-world vehicle environments by collaborating with the supplier and conducting integrated vehicle testing. Monitoring CAN bus traffic for unusual or unauthorized messages can help detect attempted exploitation. Physical security controls should be enhanced to prevent unauthorized access to the vehicle's internal networks, including securing diagnostic ports and ECUs. Automotive service centers and fleet operators should be trained to recognize signs of CAN bus tampering or malfunction. The supplier should be engaged to provide firmware or software updates if further validation confirms the vulnerability. Additionally, implementing anomaly detection systems within vehicle networks and employing secure diagnostic protocols can reduce the risk of exploitation. Finally, maintaining an incident response plan for automotive cybersecurity events will help organizations respond effectively if exploitation occurs.

Description

An issue in KIA Seltos vehicle instrument cluster with software and hardware v1.0 allows attackers to control or disrupt CAN communication between the instrument cluster and CAN bus. NOTE: this is disputed by the Supplier because the findings came from a potentially unrealistic test environment (an isolated ECU part that was not in a vehicle), and because the observed behavior follows the UDS (Unified Diagnostic Services) specification.

Impact

The potential impact of CVE-2024-51073 is significant for vehicle safety and reliability. If exploited, attackers could disrupt or manipulate CAN bus communication, potentially causing malfunctions in vehicle instrumentation, warning systems, or other critical electronic functions. This could lead to unsafe driving conditions, loss of driver information, or vehicle immobilization. For organizations, this vulnerability poses risks to automotive manufacturers, suppliers, dealerships, and fleet operators who rely on the affected KIA Seltos models. Disruption of vehicle systems could result in increased warranty claims, reputational damage, and regulatory scrutiny. Although exploitation requires physical access to the vehicle's CAN bus, sophisticated attackers or insiders could leverage this to cause targeted disruptions. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk, but the medium CVSS score and potential safety implications necessitate proactive attention.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…