dbcve.org
Heap-based Buffer OverflowWeakness · CWE-122

CVE-2024-22857

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-03-07
Patch available
A vendor patch is available. No clean upgrade release — apply the published patch.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click Patch available

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
Heap based buffer flow in zlog v1.1.0 to v1.2.17 in zlog_rule_new().The size of record_name is MAXLEN_PATH(1024) + 1 but file_path may have data upto MAXLEN_CFG_LINE(MAXLEN_PATH*4) + 1. So a check was missing in zlog_rule_new() while copying the record_name from file_path + 1 which caused the buffer overflow. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability to overwrite the zlog_record_fn record_func function pointer to get arbitrary code execution or potentially cause remote code execution (RCE).

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
How this class of weakness works · CWE-122

Data overflows a buffer allocated on the heap, corrupting neighbouring heap structures and allocator metadata that a patient attacker can groom into control of execution. It is subtler than a stack overflow but just as dangerous. The fix is validating lengths before every write and using safe allocators and bounded operations.

General guidance for the heap-based buffer overflow class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →

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

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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 · scoped
Patch available Apply the vendor patch
Vendor patch github.com →
Recommended fix High confidence

zlog v1.2.18 or later (upgrade from any version v1.1.0 through v1.2.17)

  1. Identify the current zlog version in use by checking the project's version file or build configuration
  2. Clone or pull the latest zlog repository from https://github.com/HardySimpson/zlog
  3. Review the changes in PR #251 (https://github.com/HardySimpson/zlog/pull/251) to understand the vulnerability fix
  4. Upgrade to version v1.2.18 or later which contains the security patch for this buffer overflow
  5. Rebuild and redeploy any applications that link against the zlog library
  6. Verify the upgrade by checking that the zlog_rule_new() function now properly validates the record_name length against MAXLEN_PATH before copying
Caveat No major breaking changes expected; this is a security patch release

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

We can apply and verify the patch for your build — typical engagement from $2,300. Get the patch applied

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-22857 — 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-2024-22857 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