CVE-2024-29421
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 · uneditedxmedcon 0.23.0 and fixed in v.0.24.0 is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow via libs/dicom/basic.c which allows an attacker to execute 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 · high confidencexmedcon versions 0.23.0 and earlier contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in libs/dicom/basic.c that allows attackers to overwrite memory boundaries and execute arbitrary code via specially crafted DICOM image files.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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 if xmedcon is installed on the systemRun 'which xmedcon' or search for xmedcon binary in common paths (/usr/bin/xmedcon, /usr/local/bin/xmedcon). Also check package managers: 'dpkg -l | grep xmedcon' (Debian) or 'rpm -qa | grep xmedcon' (RHEL).Affected if xmedcon is found installed on the system
-
Identify the installed xmedcon versionRun 'xmedcon --version' or 'xmedcon -v'. If using a package manager, query the installed version: 'dpkg -s xmedcon' or 'rpm -qi xmedcon'.Affected if The reported version is 0.23.0 or earlier, or no version is displayed but the package is from an older release
-
Verify the DICOM parsing library existsCheck for the vulnerable library file libs/dicom/basic.c in the source or installed files. Search installed libraries: 'find /usr -name "*dicom*"' or check the xmedcon lib directory.Affected if The DICOM parsing component (libs/dicom/basic.c or related binaries) is present on the system
-
Determine if xmedcon processes external DICOM filesReview system usage to see if xmedcon is used to import, convert, or view DICOM images from external sources. Check any scripts, workflows, or automated processes that invoke xmedcon on untrusted DICOM files.Affected if xmedcon is configured or used to process DICOM files from untrusted or external sources
A system is affected if xmedcon version 0.23.0 or earlier is installed AND the application processes DICOM files, since the buffer overflow in libs/dicom/basic.c triggers when parsing specially crafted DICOM images.
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 · scopedUpgrade xmedcon to version 0.24.0 or later to obtain the patched code. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, implement input validation on DICOM file parsing routines and consider deploying compensating controls such as input file scanning.
xmedcon v0.24.0
- Upgrade xmedcon from version 0.23.0 to version 0.24.0
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-29421 — 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-2024-29421 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