CVE-2024-9029VulnerabilityPublished 27 Sep 2024

CVE-2024-9029: fedora · Buffer Over-read

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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 27 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 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

AI-suggested

Organizations should monitor for updates and patches from the freeimage library maintainers and apply them promptly once available. In the interim, implement input validation to verify and sanitize IPTC profile sizes before processing images. Employ application-level protections such as sandboxing image processing components to contain crashes and prevent broader system impact. Use runtime memory protection tools (e.g., AddressSanitizer, ASLR, DEP) to detect and mitigate buffer over-read attempts. Restrict image uploads or processing to trusted sources where feasible, and implement rate limiting or anomaly detection to identify and block suspicious image processing requests. For web applications, consider using separate services or containers for image processing to isolate potential crashes. Maintain comprehensive logging and monitoring to detect unusual application crashes or denial of service patterns. Finally, review and update incident response plans to handle potential service disruptions caused by this vulnerability.

Description

A flaw was found in the freeimage library. Processing a crafted image can cause a buffer over-read of 1 byte in the read_iptc_profile function in the Source/Metadata/IPTC.cpp file because the size of the profile is not being sanitized, causing a crash in the application linked to the library, resulting in a denial of service.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-9029 is denial of service, where applications using the freeimage library can be forced to crash by processing maliciously crafted images. This can disrupt services that rely on image processing, including web applications, content management systems, digital asset management platforms, and any software that imports or manipulates images with IPTC metadata. Organizations may face downtime, degraded user experience, and potential operational interruptions. In environments where image processing is automated or exposed to untrusted inputs (e.g., user-uploaded images on websites), attackers can exploit this vulnerability to cause repeated crashes, leading to service unavailability. Although the vulnerability does not allow code execution or data leakage, the availability impact can be significant, especially for high-traffic services or critical infrastructure relying on image workflows. The lack of authentication and user interaction requirements increases the likelihood of exploitation. Additionally, denial of service attacks can be used as a smokescreen for other malicious activities or to disrupt business continuity.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…