CVE-2024-10238
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA security issue in the firmware image verification implementation at Supermicro MBD-X12DPG-OA6. An attacker can upload a specially crafted image that will cause a stack overflow is caused by not checking fld->used_bytes.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceA stack buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the firmware image verification code of Supermicro MBD-X12DPG-OA6 motherboards. The verification routine fails to validate the `fld->used_bytes` field before copying data, allowing an attacker who can upload a crafted firmware image to overflow the stack and potentially execute arbitrary code.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the motherboard modelRun 'dmidecode -t baseboard' or check the physical board label for model number MBD-X12DPG-OA6Affected if The installed motherboard is NOT a Supermicro MBD-X12DPG-OA6 (the vulnerability only affects this specific model)
-
Determine the installed firmware versionAccess the BMC web interface or run 'ipmitool fru print' or check Supermicro's Sumo Utility for firmware version informationAffected if You cannot determine the firmware version, or the installed version predates any available vendor patch (no patched version specified in CVE data)
-
Verify if firmware upload capability is accessibleCheck BMC/IPMI settings for firmware update functionality - look for 'Firmware Update', 'BIOS Update', or 'Image Upload' options in the web UI or via 'ipmitool raw' commandsAffected if Firmware upload/update interfaces are exposed and accessible (the vulnerability requires ability to upload a crafted firmware image)
-
Review firmware verification settingsExamine BMC configuration for any firmware signature or integrity verification settings - check if 'Secure Boot' or 'Firmware Validation' is enabled in the BMC security settingsAffected if Firmware verification is disabled or not enforced, allowing unverified firmware images to be loaded (the flaw exists in the verification routine itself)
-
Check for unauthorized firmware imagesCompare the current firmware image against known-good backups or hash values if available; look for unexpected firmware images in /tmp or upload directories on the BMCAffected if The installed firmware does not match expected baseline or unexpected firmware files exist on the system
You are affected if you have a Supermicro MBD-X12DPG-OA6 motherboard with accessible firmware upload capability and the installed firmware version predates any vendor patch for this specific vulnerability.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the vendor-supplied firmware patch when available. Until then, restrict physical access and network management interfaces to trusted personnel only to prevent unauthorized firmware uploads.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-10238 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-10238 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data