CVE-2024-11614
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 · uneditedAn out-of-bounds read vulnerability was found in DPDK's Vhost library checksum offload feature. This issue enables an untrusted or compromised guest to crash the hypervisor's vSwitch by forging Virtio descriptors to cause out-of-bounds reads. This flaw allows an attacker with a malicious VM using a virtio driver to cause the vhost-user side to crash by sending a packet with a Tx checksum offload request and an invalid csum_start offset.
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 · high confidenceOut-of-bounds read vulnerability in DPDK vhost library's checksum offload feature. Malicious VMs can send Virtio packets with Tx checksum offload requests containing invalid csum_start offsets, causing the vhost-user backend to read beyond buffer bounds and crash the hypervisor's vSwitch.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/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 DPDK versionRun `dpdk-version` if available, or check the installed DPDK library files (e.g., `ls -la /usr/lib/*/libdpdk.so*` or `ldconfig -p | grep dpdk`). Compare the version number against the fixed DPDK release that contains the csum_start validation fix.Affected if DPDK version is older than the version containing the fix and the vhost-user backend is active
-
Confirm vhost-user backend is in useCheck for vhost-user socket files (commonly in /var/run/dpdk/, /var/run/openvswitch/, or /tmp/). Look for socket files with 'vhost-user' in the name or process lists showing vhost library usage (e.g., `ps aux | grep -i vhost` or ovs-vsctl show).Affected if A vhost-user backend is running and processing Virtio packets from VMs
-
Check if checksum offload is enabled on vhost portsExamine the vSwitch configuration (e.g., OVS-DPDK, VPP, or other DPDK-based switches). Use commands like `ovs-vsctl get interface <port> options` to check for `tx-checksum-offload` or similar options, or check ethtool settings on the virtual port.Affected if Tx checksum offload is enabled on any vhost-user interface receiving Virtio packet requests from VMs
-
Review vhost library logs for crash indicatorsCheck system logs (journalctl, dmesg, or /var/log/messages) for segfaults, memory access errors, or crashes originating from vhost-user or DPDK vSwitch processes, particularly triggered by incoming Virtio traffic.Affected if Crashes or out-of-bounds memory access errors are logged from vhost-user or DPDK vSwitch processes after receiving Virtio packets with checksum offload requests
Environment is affected if a vulnerable DPDK version with vhost-user backend is running and Tx checksum offload is enabled on vhost-user interfaces that receive Virtio packets from VMs.
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 dataImplement validation of csum_start offset against packet/buffer length before processing checksum offload; update DPDK to version containing the fix.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-11614 — 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-2024-11614 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