CVE-2024-25076
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 on Renesas SmartBond DA14691, DA14695, DA14697, and DA14699 devices. The bootrom function responsible for validating the Flash Product Header directly uses a user-controllable size value (Length of Flash Config Section) to control a read from the QSPI device into a fixed sized buffer, resulting in a buffer overflow and execution of arbitrary code.
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 bootrom on Renesas SmartBond DA14691/95/97/99 devices contains a buffer overflow vulnerability where the Flash Product Header validation function uses a user-controllable size value (Length of Flash Config Section) to control a read from the QSPI device into a fixed-size buffer, allowing arbitrary code execution.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 SmartBond DA14691/95/97/99 devices in your environmentReview hardware BOMs, device schematics, or physical inspection of chip markings to determine if Renesas DA14691, DA14695, DA14697, or DA14699 SoCs are deployedAffected if Any of these four device models are present in the product
-
Determine if custom Flash Product Header configuration is usedInspect the QSPI flash memory or firmware build artifacts for a Flash Product Header section. Check if the Length of Flash Config Section field is user-configurable in your flash layoutAffected if Custom Flash Product Header with configurable length field is present in the flash image
-
Check if secure boot is enabledExamine the secure boot configuration registers or verify that boot images are signed and signature verification is enforced at boot timeAffected if Secure boot is disabled or not enforcing signed boot images
-
Verify bootrom version if accessibleIf debug interfaces are available, read the bootrom version identifier from the device or compare against Renesas release notes for bootrom revisionsAffected if Bootrom revision is earlier than any fixed release (if available) for this vulnerability
You are affected if you deploy DA14691/95/97/99 devices with a custom Flash Product Header and have secure boot disabled, as the bootrom buffer overflow can be triggered before any software-based protections load.
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 dataSince bootrom is typically read-only and cannot be patched via software updates, mitigations should focus on preventing tampering with the Flash Product Header (e.g., secure boot with signed images, hardware-level flash protection) or replacing affected devices with fixed hardware revisions.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-25076 — 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-2024-25076 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