CVE-2024-23948
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 · uneditedMultiple improper array index validation vulnerabilities exist in the readMSH functionality of libigl v2.5.0. A specially crafted .msh file can lead to an out-of-bounds write. An attacker can provide a malicious file to trigger this vulnerability.This vulnerability concerns the `igl::MshLoader::parse_nodes` function while handling an `ascii`.msh` file.
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 confidenceImproper array index validation in the `igl::MshLoader::parse_nodes` function of libigl v2.5.0 allows a specially crafted ASCII .msh file to trigger an out-of-bounds write, enabling potential memory corruption and possible code execution.
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= 2.5.0CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 libigl versionCheck the installed version of libigl in your environment (e.g., check your package manager, dependencies file, or the libigl version macro in included headers)Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.5.0
-
Locate the MshLoader componentSearch your codebase or library files for references to 'MshLoader' or the 'parse_nodes' function from the igl namespaceAffected if Your project uses or links against the MshLoader class from libigl
-
Identify .msh file parsing usageSearch your code for calls to functions that load or parse .msh files (e.g., MshLoader::read, or igl::readMSH)Affected if Your application parses .msh mesh files using libigl
-
Determine file format processedInspect the data flow or configuration to determine if ASCII-format .msh files are being parsed (versus binary .msh)Affected if Your application processes ASCII-format .msh files through libigl's MshLoader
You are affected if you have libigl v2.5.0 installed and use it to parse ASCII .msh files via the MshLoader::parse_nodes function.
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 dataUpdate to a patched version of libigl that includes proper bounds checking in the parse_nodes function, or implement input validation to reject malformed .msh files before parsing.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,568.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-23948 — 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-2024-23948 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