CVE-2024-25391
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 · uneditedA stack buffer overflow occurs in libc/posix/ipc/mqueue.c in RT-Thread through 5.0.2.
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 stack buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the POSIX message queue implementation (mqueue.c) of the RT-Thread real-time operating system. The overflow occurs in the libc/posix/ipc component and could allow an attacker to overwrite stack memory, potentially leading to code execution or system instability.
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<= 5.0.2CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/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.
-
Confirm RT-Thread is in useInspect the project for RT-Thread-specific files such as rtconfig.h, or check the build system for RT-Thread components. Look for include paths referencing rt-thread directories or the SConstruct/scons build files.Affected if The system is not built on RT-Thread - this CVE does not apply
-
Identify RT-Thread versionLocate the version header file or version definition in the RT-Thread distribution. Common paths include include/rtconfig.h, or search for RT_VERSION or rt_version macros in the source tree.Affected if Version is 5.0.2 or lower - proceed to next check
-
Verify mqueue component is enabledExamine the build configuration file (rtconfig.h) or Kconfig for RT_USING_MQUEUE or RT_USING_POSIX_MQUEUE definitions. Also check if libc/posix/ipc/mqueue.c is included in the build.Affected if Mqueue component is enabled in the build configuration - the vulnerability is present
-
Inspect mqueue.c source for vulnerabilityLocate libc/posix/ipc/mqueue.c in the RT-Thread source tree and examine the message queue handling functions for potential stack buffer operations without proper bounds checking.Affected if The code contains vulnerable stack buffer operations in message queue functions
A system is affected by this CVE if it runs RT-Thread version 5.0.2 or lower AND has the mqueue (libc/posix/ipc) component enabled in its configuration.
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 RT-Thread to a version beyond 5.0.2 that addresses the vulnerability, or implement proper bounds checking in the mqueue.c functions to prevent stack buffer overflows.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-25391 — 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-2024-25391 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