Imm Management PackageApplication · Cisco
CVE-2024-20344
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 vulnerability in system resource management in Cisco UCS 6400 and 6500 Series Fabric Interconnects that are in Intersight Managed Mode (IMM) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a denial of service (DoS) condition on the Device Console UI of an affected device. This vulnerability is due to insufficient rate-limiting of TCP connections to an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a high number of TCP packets to the Device Console UI. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to cause the Device Console UI process to crash, resulting in a DoS condition. A manual reload of the fabric interconnect is needed to restore complete functionality.
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 rate-limiting vulnerability exists in Cisco UCS 6400 and 6500 Series Fabric Interconnects running in Intersight Managed Mode (IMM). An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a high volume of TCP packets to the Device Console UI, causing the UI process to crash and resulting in a denial of service condition that requires a manual device reload to recover.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Imm Management PackageApplication
< 1.0.11-1582CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Identify the Fabric Interconnect modelUse 'show version' or check the physical device label to confirm it is a Cisco UCS 6400 or 6500 Series Fabric InterconnectAffected if The device is a UCS 6400 or 6500 Series Fabric Interconnect
-
Confirm Intersight Managed Mode is enabledCheck the device mode via Intersight UI or use 'show imm state' command to verify IMM is activeAffected if The device is running in Intersight Managed Mode (IMM)
-
Check the Imm Management Package versionRun 'show version' or query the Intersight inventory to retrieve the installed Cisco Imm Management Package version numberAffected if The Cisco Imm Management Package version is lower than 1.0.11-1582 (e.g., 1.0.9-xxxx or 1.0.10-xxxx)
-
Verify Device Console UI network accessibilityDetermine if TCP access to the Device Console UI (typically port 443 or 22 for management) is exposed to untrusted networks by reviewing firewall rules, ACLs, or interface configurationsAffected if The Device Console UI is reachable from untrusted networks without rate limiting or access controls
You are affected if you have a UCS 6400 or 6500 Series Fabric Interconnect running in IMM with Cisco Imm Management Package version below 1.0.11-1582 and the Device Console UI is network-accessible to untrusted attackers.
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.
dbcve · scoped1.0.11-1582
Implement network-level rate limiting or access controls to restrict TCP connections to the Device Console UI; consult Cisco IOS-XE or IMM documentation for built-in rate-limiting features, or deploy a WAF/IPS in front of the management interface.
IMM Management Package version 1.0.11-1582 or later
- 1. Verify current IMM Management Package version using Intersight UI or CLI
- 2. Download the fixed IMM Management Package version 1.0.11-1582 or later from Cisco
- 3. Apply the upgrade through Intersight by navigating to Infrastructure > UCS Fabric Interconnects and selecting the update option
- 4. After upgrade, verify the Device Console UI is accessible and the version is 1.0.11-1582 or higher
- 5. Test Device Console UI functionality to confirm the rate-limiting fix is working
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Imm Management Package
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-20344 — 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-2024-20344 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