dbcve.org
Integer OverflowWeakness · CWE-190

CVE-2024-22396

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-03-14
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
An Integer-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the SonicOS via IPSec allows a remote attacker in specific conditions to cause Denial of Service (DoS) and potentially execute arbitrary code by sending a specially crafted IKEv2 payload.

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 confidence

An integer-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in SonicOS IPSec implementation. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability by sending a specially crafted IKEv2 payload, potentially causing denial of service or arbitrary code execution.

MitigationApply vendor-supplied firmware patches for SonicOS when available; consider disabling IPSec/IKEv2 if not required, or restrict IPsec peer acceptance to trusted sources.

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
High
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify SonicOS device
    Determine if your network device runs SonicOS firmware (SonicWall appliances)
    Affected if Device is a SonicWall appliance running SonicOS
  2. Verify IPSec/IKEv2 is enabled
    Access SonicOS management interface and check VPN or IPSec settings to confirm IKEv2 is configured or active
    Affected if IPSec with IKEv2 is enabled on the device
  3. Check SonicOS firmware version
    In SonicOS web interface, go to System > Status or use CLI command 'show version' to display the installed firmware version
    Affected if Installed version matches or falls within the vulnerable version range (compare to vendor advisory)
  4. Inspect IKEv2 port exposure
    Review firewall rules and network accessibility of UDP ports 500 and 4500 (IKEv2 communication ports) to determine if they are exposed to untrusted networks
    Affected if IKEv2 ports are reachable from untrusted or internet-facing networks

Affected if the device runs SonicOS with IPSec/IKEv2 enabled and the firmware version falls within the vulnerable range, with IKEv2 ports exposed to untrusted sources

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor-supplied firmware patches for SonicOS when available; consider disabling IPSec/IKEv2 if not required, or restrict IPsec peer acceptance to trusted sources.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,840
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-22396 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-22396 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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