CVE-2024-33517
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 · uneditedAn unauthenticated Denial-of-Service (DoS) vulnerability exists in the Radio Frequency Manager service accessed via the PAPI protocol. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability results in the ability to interrupt the normal operation of the affected 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 confidenceAn unauthenticated attacker can send malicious requests via the PAPI protocol to the Radio Frequency Manager service, causing a denial of service that interrupts normal operations. The vulnerability requires no authentication, allowing remote attackers to exploit the service remotely.
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>= 8.10.0.0, <= 8.10.0.10>= 8.11.0.0, <= 8.11.2.1>= 10.4.0.0, <= 10.4.1.0>= 10.5.0.0, <= 10.5.1.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Verify ArubaOS versionExecute 'show version' on the Aruba controller CLI to obtain the installed OS versionAffected if The installed version falls within: 8.10.0.0-8.10.0.10, 8.11.0.0-8.11.2.1, 10.4.0.0-10.4.1.0, or 10.5.0.0-10.5.1.0
-
Confirm PAPI protocol is enabledCheck the controller configuration for PAPI protocol settings using 'show running-config | include papi' or 'show papi stats' to verify the service is activeAffected if The PAPI protocol service is enabled and running on the device
-
Assess PAPI network exposureReview access control lists (ACLs) and firewall rules to determine if the PAPI port (UDP 8211 by default) is accessible from untrusted networks. Use 'show ip access-list' and check interface configurations.Affected if PAPI service port is reachable from untrusted or external network segments without proper filtering
-
Verify authentication is enforced for PAPICheck whether PAPI authentication has been explicitly configured. Review 'show running-config' for papi-related settings and verify if any authentication mechanisms are enabled.Affected if No authentication is required or configured for PAPI protocol access, meaning the service accepts unauthenticated requests
You are affected if your ArubaOS version is within the affected ranges AND the PAPI protocol is accessible without authentication enforcement.
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 · scopedImplement authentication requirements for PAPI protocol access, apply network segmentation to restrict access to trusted sources, and deploy rate limiting or traffic filtering to mitigate malformed request-based DoS attempts.
ArubaOS 8.10.0.11+, 8.11.3.0+, 10.4.2.0+, or 10.5.2.0+ (latest stable within each branch)
- 1. Identify the current ArubaOS version running on the affected devices using 'show version' command
- 2. Based on the current version, determine the appropriate target fixed release within your version branch
- 3. For ArubaOS 8.10.x: Upgrade to version 8.10.0.11 or later
- 4. For ArubaOS 8.11.x: Upgrade to version 8.11.3.0 or later
- 5. For ArubaOS 10.4.x: Upgrade to version 10.4.2.0 or later
- 6. For ArubaOS 10.5.x: Upgrade to version 10.5.2.0 or later
- 7. Download the appropriate upgrade image from the Aruba support portal (https://asp.arubanetworks.com)
- 8. Follow standard Aruba upgrade procedures: upload the image, validate checksum, reboot or perform graceful upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,848.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-33517 — 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-2024-33517 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