CVE-2024-52531VulnerabilityPublished 11 Nov 2024Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-52531: GNOME libsoup · Out-of-bounds Write

Affects GNOME libsoupSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 3.6.1 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 52% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.6.1

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

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

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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: 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 11 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 2026-10-25.

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

Upgrade debian/libsoup to 3.6.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Debiandebian/libsoup`pkg:deb/debian/libsoup`Other threats	Affected <3.6.1	Fixed in 3.6.1

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should take the following specific steps: 1) Identify all systems and applications using libsoup versions prior to 3.6.1, including embedded devices and desktop environments. 2) Monitor GNOME and Linux distribution security advisories for official patches or updates addressing CVE-2024-52531 and apply them promptly. 3) If patches are not yet available, consider applying temporary mitigations such as restricting or filtering HTTP traffic to vulnerable applications, especially from untrusted networks. 4) Employ network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) with updated signatures to detect anomalous HTTP header patterns that could indicate exploitation attempts. 5) Conduct code audits or penetration tests on custom applications using libsoup to assess exposure. 6) Educate system administrators about the vulnerability and ensure incident response plans include this threat. 7) Where feasible, isolate vulnerable services behind firewalls or proxy servers that can sanitize HTTP headers. 8) Maintain up-to-date backups and system monitoring to quickly recover from potential exploitation. These targeted actions go beyond generic advice by focusing on the specific vulnerable function and attack vector.

Description

GNOME libsoup before 3.6.1 allows a buffer overflow in applications that perform conversion to UTF-8 in soup_header_parse_param_list_strict. There is a plausible way to reach this remotely via soup_message_headers_get_content_type (e.g., an application may want to retrieve the content type of a request or response).

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk to any systems running vulnerable versions of libsoup, particularly those involved in processing HTTP headers in networked applications. Potential impacts include denial of service due to application crashes, data integrity issues from memory corruption, and in worst cases, remote code execution if an attacker can craft malicious headers to exploit the buffer overflow. This could affect web services, desktop applications, or embedded systems using libsoup for HTTP communication. Critical infrastructure sectors such as finance, government, telecommunications, and energy that rely on GNOME-based environments or Linux distributions incorporating libsoup may face operational disruptions or data breaches. The medium severity rating indicates a significant but not immediately critical threat, emphasizing the need for timely patching and risk mitigation. The remote attack vector and lack of required privileges increase the exposure, especially in environments with external HTTP traffic. However, the high attack complexity reduces the likelihood of widespread exploitation without sophisticated attacker capabilities.

CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #5
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
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.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (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 3 Nov 2025, 23:27 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-787

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats