CVE-2024-25969
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 9.7.0.1 contains an allocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability. A local 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 9.7.0.1 contains a resource allocation vulnerability where the system fails to enforce limits or throttling on certain operations. A local unauthenticated attacker could exploit this to exhaust system resources, causing denial of service. This is a classic resource exhaustion flaw in the storage system's resource management framework.
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, <= 9.7.0.1CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Determine PowerScale OneFS versionUse the OneFS CLI to retrieve the installed version (for example, run 'isi version' or 'isi status' from the cluster shell). Compare the reported version number to the affected ranges.Affected if The installed version is 8.2.0 through 9.3.0, 9.4.0 through 9.4.0.17, 9.5.0.0 through 9.5.0.7, or 9.6.0 through 9.7.0.1.
-
Verify resource throttling configurationInspect the OneFS resource management or quota configuration settings via the CLI (for example, 'isi quota' or 'isi statistics' commands) or through the WebUI under the resource management section.Affected if No explicit throttling or limit controls are configured for the operations that could be exploited.
-
Monitor for abnormal resource consumptionReview system resource usage metrics such as CPU, memory, and storage I/O through the OneFS dashboard or CLI statistics commands. Look for unusually high or sustained resource utilization without an corresponding workload justification.Affected if Resource consumption is excessively high or appears abnormal given the current workload, which may indicate active exploitation.
You are affected if your PowerScale OneFS version falls within the specified vulnerable ranges AND the system lacks resource throttling controls, allowing uncontrolled operation execution that could exhaust resources.
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 data9.4.0.189.5.0.8
Apply the vendor patch from Dell for PowerScale OneFS to the affected versions (8.2.x through 9.7.0.1). Coordinate a maintenance window for the upgrade as this is a cluster storage system. If immediate patching is not feasible, implement monitoring for unusual resource consumption patterns as a temporary compensatory control.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-25969 — 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-2024-25969 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