CVE-2024-23916
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 · uneditedUnchecked Return Value to NULL Pointer Dereference vulnerability in Open Networking Foundation (ONF) libfluid (libfluid_msg module). This vulnerability is associated with program routines fluid_msg::ActionSet::unpack. This issue affects libfluid: 0.1.0.
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 NULL pointer dereference vulnerability exists in libfluid's fluid_msg::ActionSet::unpack function. The function fails to validate a return value before using it, leading to dereferencing a NULL pointer when the unchecked value is accessed. This can cause a denial of service or potentially arbitrary code execution if an attacker can control the input to trigger the NULL return.
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= 0.1.0CVSS 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 libfluid-msg installationSearch for libfluid library files in the system or check project dependencies (e.g., look for libfluid-msg in package managers, build artifacts, or source code dependencies)Affected if libfluid-msg library is present in the environment
-
Determine installed version of libfluid-msgCheck the version of the libfluid-msg library (examine library file metadata, check package.json, Cargo.toml, requirements.txt, or other dependency manifests that reference libfluid)Affected if The version is 0.1.0
-
Verify usage of ActionSet::unpackSearch source code or binary for usage of the ActionSet::unpack function, which is called during OpenFlow message parsing (typically when receiving and unpacking OpenFlow messages)Affected if The application calls ActionSet::unpack to process incoming messages
-
Confirm untrusted input handlingDetermine whether the system processes OpenFlow messages from untrusted network sources (check if the OpenFlow controller or switch accepts messages from external/unauthenticated parties)Affected if Untrusted or external OpenFlow messages are processed by the vulnerable function
User is affected if libfluid-msg version 0.1.0 is installed AND their application uses ActionSet::unpack to process OpenFlow messages from untrusted sources.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of libfluid that properly validates return values in the ActionSet::unpack function before dereferencing, or implement NULL checks on all return values from called functions within the unpack routine.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-23916 — 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-2024-23916 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