CVE-2024-23170
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 2.x before 2.28.7 and 3.x before 3.5.2. There was a timing side channel in RSA private operations. This side channel could be sufficient for a local attacker to recover the plaintext. It requires the attacker to send a large number of messages for decryption, as described in "Everlasting ROBOT: the Marvin Attack" by Hubert Kario.
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 confidenceMbed TLS contains a timing side channel in RSA private key operations that could allow a local attacker to recover plaintext by analyzing timing differences during decryption. The attack requires sending a large number of decryption messages to the target system, as described in the Marvin Attack research. This is a implementation-level flaw in the RSA decryption code that leaks information through timing variations.
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>= 2.0.0, < 2.28.7>= 3.0.0, < 3.5.2CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 Mbed TLS library versionLocate the mbedtls library files (libmbedtls.so, mbedtls.dll, or via package manager) and run 'grep -i version' on the binary, check the library's header file, or query the library programmatically via mbedtls_version_get_number() APIAffected if The version is 2.0.0 through 2.28.6, or 3.0.0 through 3.5.1
-
Identify product using Mbed TLSSearch codebase or binary dependencies for 'mbedtls' or 'mbed crypto' references, or check application documentation for TLS library dependenciesAffected if The application links against an affected Mbed TLS version
-
Check if RSA private key operations are performedSearch application code for calls to mbedtls_rsa_decrypt, mbedtls_rsa_private, or similar RSA private key functions. Also check configuration files for RSA key usageAffected if The application performs RSA decryption or signing operations using Mbed TLS RSA functions
-
Determine RSA input exposureReview whether RSA decryption inputs come from untrusted network sources, remote clients, or user-controlled data. Check if the system accepts and processes RSA-encrypted data from external sourcesAffected if RSA decryption is performed on data from untrusted or remote sources without rate limiting or additional protections
-
Check for timing-constant RSA implementationReview Mbed TLS build configuration or source code for MBEDTLS_RSA_ALT definitions, or verify the mbedtls_rsa_context structure includes timing-constant operations. Compare your build against the patched version's RSA implementationAffected if The RSA implementation does not use constant-time operations for decryption (vulnerable to timing analysis)
-
Audit RSA usage patternsLog or monitor RSA decryption operations to determine volume and source. Check if systems process many RSA decryption requests, as the Marvin Attack requires many ciphertexts for exploitationAffected if The system processes high volumes of RSA decryption requests from potentially untrusted sources
You are affected if your system uses Mbed TLS versions 2.0.0-2.28.6 or 3.0.0-3.5.1 AND performs RSA private key operations on data from untrusted sources, making it vulnerable to the Marvin Attack timing side channel.
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 · scoped2.28.73.5.2
Update Mbed TLS to version 2.28.7 or 3.5.2 or later to receive the timing-constant patch. If immediate patching is not feasible, ensure RSA private key operations are not exposed to untrusted input.
Mbed TLS 2.x -> 2.28.7; Mbed TLS 3.x -> 3.5.2
- 1. Identify the currently installed Mbed TLS version using your package manager or build system
- 2. For Mbed TLS 2.x series: upgrade to version 2.28.7 or later
- 3. For Mbed TLS 3.x series: upgrade to version 3.5.2 or later
- 4. Rebuild any applications that link against Mbed TLS to use the updated library
- 5. Test the RSA decryption functionality to ensure proper operation after the update
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-23170 — 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-2024-23170 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