CVE-2024-55626VulnerabilityPublished 6 Jan 2025Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-55626: OISF suricata · Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow

Affects OISF suricataSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.3 Low : upgrade to 7.0.8 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.3Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.0.8

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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 6 Jan 2025
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 2026-10-26.

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 oisf/suricata to 7.0.8.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHuboisf/suricata`pkg:github/oisf/suricata`Other threats	Affected <7.0.8	Fixed in 7.0.8

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 immediately upgrade Suricata to version 7.0.8 or later to eliminate this vulnerability. Until upgrades are applied, restrict local access to systems running Suricata to trusted administrators only and enforce strict access controls and monitoring to detect unauthorized attempts to supply malicious BPF filter files. Implement application whitelisting or integrity checks on configuration files, including BPF filters, to prevent unauthorized modifications. Regularly audit startup scripts and configuration management processes to ensure only validated filters are used. Additionally, consider deploying redundant or failover network monitoring systems to maintain visibility if Suricata becomes unavailable. Security teams should also monitor for unusual Suricata crashes or startup failures that could indicate exploitation attempts. Finally, maintain up-to-date incident response plans that include scenarios involving loss of network monitoring capabilities.

Description

Suricata is a network Intrusion Detection System, Intrusion Prevention System and Network Security Monitoring engine. Prior to 7.0.8, a large BPF filter file provided to Suricata at startup can lead to a buffer overflow at Suricata startup. The issue has been addressed in Suricata 7.0.8.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2024-55626 is the potential disruption of network security monitoring and intrusion detection capabilities due to Suricata crashing or failing to start. This can reduce visibility into network threats and delay incident response, increasing the risk of undetected attacks. Critical infrastructure operators, financial institutions, and government agencies relying on Suricata for real-time network defense could experience temporary loss of monitoring coverage, which may have regulatory and operational consequences. Since the vulnerability does not affect confidentiality or integrity, data breaches are unlikely directly from this flaw. However, the reduced availability of Suricata could indirectly increase exposure to other threats. The requirement for local access and user interaction limits remote exploitation, but insider threats or compromised local accounts could leverage this vulnerability to disrupt security operations.

CWE-680Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Compound weakness
The product performs a calculation to determine how much memory to allocate, but an integer overflow can occur that causes less memory to be allocated than expected, leading to a buffer overflow.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Overflow Buffers (opens in a new tab)
Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links (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, 20:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-680

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats