CVE-2024-25966
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 · uneditedDell PowerScale OneFS versions 8.2.x through 9.7.0.2 contains an improper handling of unexpected data type vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to denial of service.
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 confidenceDell PowerScale OneFS versions 8.2.x through 9.7.0.2 contains an improper handling of unexpected data type vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker can send specially crafted requests containing unexpected data types that the application fails to properly process, causing the service to crash or become unresponsive, resulting in denial of service.
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>= 8.2.0, <= 9.3.0>= 9.4.0, < 9.4.0.18>= 9.5.0.0, < 9.5.0.8>= 9.6.0, < 9.7.0.3CVSS 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 the installed PowerScale OneFS versionRun the command 'isi version' or 'isi_status' on the OneFS CLI to retrieve the exact firmware versionAffected if The displayed version falls within any of these ranges: 8.2.0 to 9.3.0 (inclusive); 9.4.0 to 9.4.0.17; 9.5.0.0 to 9.5.0.7; 9.6.0 to 9.7.0.2
-
Verify the management interface network exposureCheck the OneFS network configuration by examining the access zone settings and firewall rules using 'isi network interfaces' and verify which IPs/networks can reach the OneFS admin ports (443, 8080)Affected if The OneFS management interfaces (HTTPS admin portal, OneFS REST API) are accessible from untrusted or public networks without authentication restrictions
-
Confirm whether the service handles unauthenticated requestsReview the OneFS access zone and authentication configuration using 'isi auth' commands or check if the 'System' zone permits anonymous or unauthenticated API accessAffected if Unauthenticated requests can reach the OneFS API or web interface without authentication being enforced
You are affected if your OneFS version is 9.7.0.2 or lower within the specified ranges AND your management interfaces are exposed to untrusted networks where an unauthenticated attacker could send crafted requests.
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.
dbcve · scoped9.4.0.189.5.0.89.7.0.3
Apply the vendor patch (Dell PowerScale OneFS 9.7.0.3 or later) to remediate this vulnerability. If immediate patching is not feasible, implement network segmentation and restrict unauthenticated access to OneFS management interfaces to reduce attack surface.
Upgrade to OneFS 9.7.0.3 or later, or the latest 9.4.0.x (9.4.0.18+), 9.5.0.x (9.5.0.8+), or 9.6.x release based on your current branch
- 1. Determine current PowerScale OneFS version using 'isi version' or through the web interface (Cluster Management > Overview)
- 2. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade (this is a cluster-wide update)
- 3. Back up cluster configuration and ensure adequate space for the upgrade
- 4. Download the appropriate OneFS ISO image from Dell Support (drivers.dell.com) for the target version
- 5. Upload the ISO to the cluster using 'isi clusterscp' or through the web interface
- 6. Initiate upgrade using 'isi cluster update' command or through the web interface (Cluster Management > Updates)
- 7. Monitor the upgrade progress - this may take several hours depending on cluster size
- 8. After upgrade completes, verify the new version using 'isi version'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-25966 — 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-2024-25966 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