Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2024-32018· NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

Ineffective size check due to assert() and buffer overflow in RIOT

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 36/100)

  • The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
  • Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1.5% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 74.3% of all records.
  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
  • According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
  • Mentioned 1 time in Turkish national cyber security advisories (siberguvenlik.gov.tr).

Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

RIOT is a real-time multi-threading operating system that supports a range of devices that are typically 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit microcontrollers. Most codebases define assertion macros which compile to a no-op on non-debug builds. If assertions are the only line of defense against untrusted input, the software may be exposed to attacks that leverage the lack of proper input checks. In detail, in the `nimble_scanlist_update()` function below, `len` is checked in an assertion and subsequently used in a call to `memcpy()`. If an attacker is able to provide a larger `len` value while assertions are compiled-out, they can write past the end of the fixed-length `e->ad` buffer. If the unchecked input above is attacker-controlled and crosses a security boundary, the impact of the buffer overflow vulnerability could range from denial of service to arbitrary code execution. This issue has not yet been patched. Users are advised to add manual `len` checking.

CriticalCVSS 9.0 · v3.1—No exploit No fix recorded
Published
May 1, 2024
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
1.5% · 74th percentile

Report tools

JSON

Action score

36

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
36 / 40 · 9.0 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 1.5%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
9.0
CNA · GitHub_M
8.8
0.2 point gap

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

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Get told when this record changes

  • Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
  • No public exploit code on record
  • No fixed version yet

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Follow CVE-2024-32018

When you'll hear from us

  • when it enters CISA KEV
  • when exploit code appears or is weaponized
  • when the record is updated (including a fixed version)
  • when EPSS rises 20 points in a week

One daily email digest (06:00 UTC); connect a webhook for KEV listings and weaponized exploits instantly.

Your free account also gets you

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

  • Stack alerts: add the products and versions you run, get the new CVEs that affect them
  • Port scanning: 5 full scans a day (members only)
  • Uptime monitoring: 1 site, instant email when it goes down
  • Verify your domain: subdomains and takeover risk scanned every week
  • 10 scans an hour on the security tools (3 a day without an account), an API key and MCP
All free tools

Sign up with email · Have an account? Sign in

Free account, no card. Unfollow any time.

Don't want an account? Get "Exploited this week" by email every MondayDon't want an account? RSS feed for riot-os records

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

VendorProduct
riot-osriot

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • riot-os riotup to 2024.01 inclusive

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • RIOT-OS RIOT

    • <= 2023.10affected

Same product

riot-os: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2021-27427RIOT OS Integer Overflow or Wraparound
    40Plan
  • CVE-2026-27703RIOT has an Out-of-Bounds Write in nanoCoAP Handler
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2023-33975RIOT-OS vulnerable to Out of Bounds Write in _rbuf_add
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2023-24823RIOT-OS vulnerable to Packet Type Confusion during IPHC send
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2023-24819RIOT-OS vulnerable to Buffer Overflow during IPHC receive
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2021-27698RIOT-OS 2021.01 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in /sys/net/gnrc/routing/rpl/gnrc_rpl_control_messages.c through the _parse_options
    39Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

  • CVE-2024-312250 days apartLack of size check and buffer overflow in RIOT
    36Monitor
  • CVE-2024-320170 days apartBuffer overflows in RIOT
    36Monitor
  • CVE-2025-53888443 days apartRIOT-OS has an ineffective size check that can lead to buffer overflow in link layer address filter /sys/net/link_layer/l2filter/l2filter.c
    26Monitor

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

National notice (Türkiye Cybersecurity Directorate / USOM)

Official security notices citing this record; remediation advice is on the agency's page.

All national notices →

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted

Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
High
Availability impact
High

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-120 · Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')

CVSS vector

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

nvd-primary

Root cause

When data is copied, the source length is not compared with the size of the destination buffer. Excess data overwrites adjacent memory.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-120 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

c
char buf[256];memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);

Fixed

c
char buf[256];if (pkt->len > sizeof(buf)) {  return -EINVAL;}memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

References

Show all references (2 more)

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records