CVE-2024-22053
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 heap overflow vulnerability in IPSec component of Ivanti Connect Secure (9.x 22.x) and Ivanti Policy Secure allows an unauthenticated malicious user to send specially crafted requests in-order-to crash the service thereby causing a DoS attack or in certain conditions read contents from memory.
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 heap overflow vulnerability exists in the IPSec component of Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure VPN gateways. An unauthenticated attacker can send specially crafted IPSec requests to trigger the heap overflow, potentially causing denial of service by crashing the service or, under certain conditions, reading arbitrary memory contents.
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= 9.1= 22.1= 22.2= 22.3= 22.4= 22.5= 22.6= 9.0= 9.1= 22.1= 22.2= 22.3= 22.4= 22.5= 22.6CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 the product and versionLog into the Ivanti admin console and navigate to System > Administration > System Summary, or run 'show version' via CLI. Determine if the device is Ivanti Connect Secure or Policy Secure and note the exact firmware version.Affected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions: Connect Secure 9.1, 22.1-22.6 or Policy Secure 9.0-9.1, 22.1-22.6
-
Confirm IPSec gateway is enabledIn the admin console, go to VPN > IPSec Gateway or VPN > IPSec Settings. Check if any IPSec tunnels or gateways are configured and enabled.Affected if IPSec gateways or tunnels are configured and active on the device
-
Verify IPSec service is listeningFrom the device CLI, run 'show ipsec status' or check which ports/daemons are listening for IPSec IKE negotiations (typically UDP 500, UDP 4500).Affected if The IPSec IKE service is running and accepting connections
-
Check network exposure of the VPN interfaceReview firewall rules or network access lists to determine if the external VPN interface (port 500/4500) is reachable from untrusted networks or the public internet.Affected if The IPSec service is exposed to untrusted or public network segments without restrictive ACLs
The environment is affected if the device runs a vulnerable Connect Secure or Policy Secure version with IPSec enabled and accessible to potential 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.
From vendor dataApply vendor-provided patches for Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure when available; until then, restrict network access to the IPSec service to trusted sources and monitor for indicators of exploitation.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-22053 — 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-2024-22053 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