CVE-2024-24911
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 · uneditedIn rare scenarios, the cpca process on the Security Management Server / Domain Management Server may exit unexpectedly, creating a core dump file. When the cpca process is down, VPN and SIC connectivity issues may occur if the CRL is not present in the Security Gateway's CRL cache.
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 confidenceThe cpca (Certificate Publishing Authority) process on Check Point Security Management Server or Domain Management Server can exit unexpectedly in rare scenarios, generating a core dump file. This causes VPN and SIC (Secure Internal Communication) connectivity failures on Security Gateways when the Certificate Revocation List (CRL) is not present in the gateway's local cache.
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= r81= r81.10= r81.20= r82CVSS 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.
-
Check Gaia OS versionRun 'cpstat -f os_version os' or 'cat /etc/version' to determine the installed Gaia OS versionAffected if Version matches r81, r81.10, r81.20, or r82 exactly (not later versions)
-
Verify cpca process is runningRun 'ps -ef | grep cpca' to check if the cpca (Certificate Publishing Authority) process is currently runningAffected if cpca process is not running or has exited unexpectedly
-
Search for cpca core dump filesCheck for core dump files in directories such as /var/log, /var/dump, or /var/crash. Use: 'find /var -name "core*" -mtime -30 2>/dev/null' to find recently created core dumpsAffected if A core dump file exists that corresponds to the cpca process
-
Check Security Gateway CRL cache statusOn Security Gateways, run 'cpstat -f vpn vpn' or check the CRL cache configuration via 'cphaprob -a if' to verify if CRL caching is enabled and populatedAffected if CRL is not cached locally on the Security Gateway and cpca is unavailable, causing connectivity failures
Environment is affected if running Gaia OS r81, r81.10, r81.20, or r82 AND the cpca process has exited (confirmed by core dump or missing process) AND CRL is not locally cached on Security Gateways, resulting in VPN or SIC connectivity failures.
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 dataEnsure CRL caching is properly configured on Security Gateways to maintain connectivity when the cpca process is unavailable; apply vendor patches for the cpca process instability once available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-24911 — 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-2024-24911 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