CVE-2024-3017
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 · uneditedIn a Silicon Labs multi-protocol gateway, a corrupt pointer to buffered data on a multi-protocol radio co-processor (RCP) causes the OpenThread Border Router(OTBR) application task running on the host platform to crash, allowing an attacker to cause a temporary 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 confidenceA memory corruption vulnerability in Silicon Labs multi-protocol gateways exists where a corrupt pointer to buffered data on the radio co-processor (RCP) causes the OpenThread Border Router (OTBR) application running on the host platform to crash, resulting in temporary denial-of-service.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 Silicon Labs multi-protocol gateway hardwareLocate the device model number and verify it is a Silicon Labs multi-protocol gateway (check product labels, firmware banner, or management interface)Affected if Device is a Silicon Labs multi-protocol gateway with RCP hardware
-
Verify OpenThread Border Router is runningCheck for OTBR process on the host platform (ps aux | grep otbr or similar) or check if port 8081/TCP is listening (OTBR REST API)Affected if OTBR application is actively running on the gateway host
-
Confirm RCP firmware versionAccess RCP firmware version via Silicon Labs configuration tool, serial console to RCP, or OTBR diagnostic interface (typically through /etc/ot_commissioning or similar RCP status endpoint)Affected if RCP firmware version is unpatched and within affected range (compare against any available vendor version information)
-
Check gateway network exposureReview firewall rules, access control lists, or network segmentation to determine if gateway is accessible from untrusted networksAffected if Gateway has unrestricted network access allowing potential attackers to reach OTBR/RCP interfaces
You are affected if you are running a Silicon Labs multi-protocol gateway with an active OTBR application and unpatched RCP firmware, regardless of network exposure.
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 dataApply vendor-supplied firmware updates for the multi-protocol RCP when available; until then, restrict physical and network access to the gateway to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-3017 — 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-2024-3017 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