CVE-2024-11344
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 type confusion vulnerability has been identified in the Postscript interpreter in various Lexmark devices. The vulnerability can be leveraged by an attacker to execute arbitrary code.
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 type confusion vulnerability exists in the PostScript interpreter of Lexmark devices. This vulnerability allows an attacker to potentially execute arbitrary code by manipulating PostScript jobs processed by the device.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Confirm device is a Lexmark deviceAccess the device web interface or check the physical label to verify the device manufacturer is Lexmark. This vulnerability only affects Lexmark devices.Affected if The device is not a Lexmark printer or multifunction device
-
Identify the firmware versionAccess the Lexmark device web interface (typically via http://[device IP]/ or through the embedded web server), navigate to Settings > Firmware or similar, and record the installed firmware version number.Affected if The installed firmware version falls within an affected version range and has not been patched
-
Verify PostScript interpreter is enabledAccess the device settings via the web interface or control panel menu. Navigate to Print Settings > Emulations or Printer Setup and check if PostScript emulation is enabled. This is often labeled as 'PostScript', 'PS', or 'PostScript Emulation'.Affected if PostScript emulation is enabled and processing print jobs from untrusted sources
-
Check for unusual PostScript job processingReview device event logs, print job logs, or syslog if configured. Look for failed or suspicious PostScript jobs that may indicate exploitation attempts or unusual processing behavior.Affected if There are logged PostScript jobs showing errors, unexpected behavior, or jobs from untrusted sources
A user is affected if they have a Lexmark device with an unpatched firmware version where PostScript emulation is enabled and processing jobs from potentially untrusted sources.
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 available Lexmark firmware updates when released. Consider restricting PostScript job processing to trusted sources and monitoring for unusual printer behavior.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,712.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-11344 — 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-2024-11344 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