Connext Professional: Out-of-bounds Write
CVE-2024-52063 is a high-severity out-of-bounds write vulnerability in Connext Professional from RTI, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.3 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 7.3.0.5, 6.1.2.21, 6.0.1.40 as the first without the flaw, so updating Connext Professional to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.34% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update Connext Professional to 7.3.0.5 or 6.1.2.21 or 6.0.1.40 or 5.3.1.45, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Read the advisory on rti.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| RTI | Connext Professional | 7.0.0 up to, but not including, 7.3.0.5; 6.1.0 up to, but not including, 6.1.2.21; 6.0.0 up to, but not including, 6.0.1.40; 4.4 up to, but not including, 5.3.1.45 | 7.3.0.5, 6.1.2.21, 6.0.1.40, 5.3.1.45 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Attack requirements
- PresentThe target must be in a specific state or configuration for the attack to work.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- NoneNo loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
- Confidentiality (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Integrity (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Availability (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 8.3 | High | CNA |
| CVSS 3.1 | 8.6 | High | CISA (ADP) |
Official description
Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') vulnerability in RTI Connext Professional (Core Libraries, Routing Service) allows Overflow Variables and Tags.This issue affects Connext Professional: from 7.0.0 before 7.3.0.5, from 6.1.0 before 6.1.2.21, from 6.0.0 before 6.0.1.40, from 5.0.0 before 5.3.1.45.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Out-of-bounds Write
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
- 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 checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Advisories
Other vulnerabilities in Connext Professional
- 7.7 High severity
- 10.0 Critical severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 9.2 Critical severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
Recent Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.