CVE-2024-32852
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 8.2.2.x through 9.7.0.0 contain use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. An unprivileged network malicious attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to data leaks.
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 8.2.2.x through 9.7.0.0 use a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm that could allow an unprivileged network attacker to exploit the weakness and leak data.
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, < 9.5.1.0>= 9.6.0, < 9.7.1.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 PowerScale OneFS version via CLIRun 'isi version' or 'isi_get_versions' command on the PowerScale node to retrieve the installed OneFS version.Affected if The displayed version falls within 8.2.0 to 9.5.0.x, or 9.6.0 to 9.7.0.x ranges.
-
Verify version via web management interfaceLog into the PowerScale OneFS web UI and navigate to the About or System Information page to confirm the firmware version.Affected if The version shown is below 9.5.1.0 or between 9.6.0 and 9.7.0.0.
-
Confirm the vulnerability scope appliesThis vulnerability affects the cryptographic implementation in the base product. If the version is in the affected range, the system uses the weak crypto by default.Affected if Any PowerScale OneFS installation with a version matching 8.2.0 <= version < 9.5.1.0 or 9.6.0 <= version < 9.7.1.0 is using the vulnerable cryptographic algorithm.
You are affected if your PowerScale OneFS version is 8.2.0 through 9.5.0.x or 9.6.0 through 9.7.0.0.
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 · scoped9.5.1.09.7.1.0
Upgrade Dell PowerScale OneFS to a version beyond 9.7.0.0 to remediate the vulnerable cryptographic implementation.
OneFS 9.7.1.0 or later (for 9.6.x-9.7.0.x users); OneFS 9.5.1.0 or later (for 8.2.x-9.5.0.x users)
- Verify current OneFS version by running 'isi version' or checking the web admin console
- Review Dell PowerScale OneFS upgrade documentation for your current version
- Download the appropriate OneFS 9.7.1.0 or later ISO from Dell Support
- Create a backup of cluster configuration and data
- Schedule a maintenance window as upgrades require cluster downtime
- Follow Dell's official upgrade procedure - typically via 'isi upgrades' CLI or web admin
- Verify the upgrade completed successfully with 'isi version'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-32852 — 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-2024-32852 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