CVE-2024-20351
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 the TCP/IP traffic handling function of the Snort Detection Engine of Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software and Cisco FirePOWER Services could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause legitimate network traffic to be dropped, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. This vulnerability is due to the improper handling of TCP/IP network traffic. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a large amount of TCP/IP network traffic through the affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause the Cisco FTD device to drop network traffic, resulting in a DoS condition. The affected device must be rebooted to resolve the DoS condition.
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 confidenceA denial of service vulnerability exists in the Snort Detection Engine's TCP/IP traffic handling function of Cisco Firepower Threat Defense and FirePOWER Services. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a large volume of TCP/IP traffic through the affected device, causing it to drop legitimate network traffic. The device requires a reboot to recover from the DoS condition.
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= 6.2.3= 6.2.3.1= 6.2.3.2= 6.2.3.3= 6.2.3.4= 6.2.3.5= 6.2.3.6= 6.2.3.7= 6.2.3.8= 6.2.3.9= 6.2.3.10= 6.2.3.11CVSS 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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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 installed Firepower Threat Defense versionRun 'show version' command on the device CLI or access the management center to view the running software versionAffected if The displayed version matches 6.2.3, 6.2.3.1, 6.2.3.2, 6.2.3.3, 6.2.3.4, 6.2.3.5, 6.2.3.6, 6.2.3.7, 6.2.3.8, 6.2.3.9, 6.2.3.10, or 6.2.3.11
-
Confirm Snort Detection Engine is enabledRun 'show snort status' or check the intrusion policy configuration via the Firepower Management CenterAffected if Snort detection engine is actively running and inspecting traffic
-
Review for traffic drop eventsRun 'show conn count' and examine system logs for sudden increases in dropped packets or connection failuresAffected if Unusually high packet drop rates or connection resets are logged, especially after receiving large volumes of TCP traffic
The environment is affected if it runs any Firepower Threat Defense version from 6.2.3 through 6.2.3.11 with Snort Detection Engine enabled and is experiencing elevated TCP traffic drops.
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 Cisco vendor patch when available. In the interim, consider rate limiting or filtering to reduce the impact of excessive TCP/IP traffic directed at the affected device.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,992.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-20351 — 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-2024-20351 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