CVE-2024-31853
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 vulnerability has been identified in SICAM TOOLBOX II (All versions < V07.11). During establishment of a https connection to the TLS server of a managed device, the affected application doesn't check the extended key usage attribute of that device's certificate. This could allow an attacker to execute an on-path network (MitM) attack.
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 confidenceSICAM TOOLBOX II fails to validate the Extended Key Usage (EKU) attribute during TLS certificate verification when connecting to managed devices. This allows an attacker with on-path capabilities to present a certificate that may be valid but intended for other purposes (e.g., client authentication, code signing), bypassing the intended server authentication checks and enabling MitM attacks.
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< 07.11CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Identify the installed SICAM TOOLBOX II versionOpen the application and navigate to Help > About, or check the installation directory for version information in the program files. Compare the version number to the 07.11 threshold.Affected if The installed version is below 07.11 (e.g., 07.10, 07.00, or earlier)
-
Determine if TLS communication with managed devices is activeReview the application configuration or connection settings to see if any TCP/IP or secure communication channels to managed devices are configured and enabled.Affected if TLS connections to managed devices are configured and active
-
Inspect the server certificates used by managed devicesExport or retrieve the certificates from managed devices or the application trust store. Use a certificate viewer (such as OpenSSL: openssl x509 -in cert.pem -text -noout) to examine the Extended Key Usage extension.Affected if The certificates lack the serverAuth EKU (1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.1) or contain additional EKUs such as clientAuth, codeSigning, or are missing EKU entirely
-
Verify if the application validates EKU during TLS handshakeAttempt a TLS connection to a managed device using a test certificate with a non-serverAuth EKU (e.g., clientAuth only). Monitor whether the connection is accepted or rejected by the application.Affected if The application accepts TLS connections from devices presenting certificates without valid serverAuth EKU
A defender is affected if SICAM TOOLBOX II version is below 07.11 AND TLS connections to managed devices are active, particularly if those devices use certificates lacking the serverAuth EKU.
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 · scoped07.11
Upgrade to SICAM TOOLBOX II V07.11 or later which includes proper EKU validation. Alternatively, ensure only certificates with correct serverAuth EKU are deployed to managed devices and consider network segmentation to reduce MitM risk.
V07.11
- Obtain SICAM TOOLBOX II version V07.11 or later from the official Siemens cert-portal or Siemens support channels
- Back up the current SICAM TOOLBOX II configuration and any important data
- Install or upgrade to SICAM TOOLBOX II version V07.11
- After upgrade, verify that the application now properly validates the extended key usage (EKU) attribute of TLS server certificates
- Test HTTPS connections to managed devices to confirm proper certificate validation is functioning
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2024-31853 — 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-2024-31853 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