CVE-2024-34020
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 stack-based buffer overflow was found in the putSDN() function of mail.c in hcode through 2.1.
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 stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the putSDN() function within mail.c of the hcode library (versions up to 2.1). The vulnerability occurs when handling mail data, allowing an attacker to overflow a fixed-size buffer on the stack, potentially leading to code execution or 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Locate hcode library in your environmentSearch for files named 'hcode', 'libhcode', or 'mail.c' in common library directories (/usr/lib, /usr/local/lib, /opt) and source code repositories. Also check project dependencies for 'hcode' references.Affected if The hcode library (any version) is present in your environment.
-
Determine the installed version of hcodeCheck version information in the library file (run 'strings libhcode.so' or 'file libhcode*'), look for a VERSION file, check include headers for version defines, or review package.json/setup.py if it's a language-specific library.Affected if The version is 2.1 or lower, or no version is resolvable but the library appears to be hcode.
-
Identify applications or services using hcodeSearch your codebase or deployed applications for '#include mail.c' or calls to putSDN() function. Use 'grep -r putSDN' in source directories. Check build logs or dependency trees for mail.c compilation.Affected if Code that calls the putSDN() function or includes mail.c is present and compiled.
-
Verify if mail data processing is enabledReview application configuration to determine if the mail handling feature of hcode is active. Check for mail-related configuration flags, processing pipelines, or runtime parameters that enable mail data ingestion.Affected if Your application or service processes mail data using hcode.
-
Check for input vectors to putSDNExamine how mail data reaches putSDN() - review network listeners, file parsers, or APIs that accept mail content. Determine if untrusted mail data can reach the vulnerable function.Affected if External or untrusted mail data can be supplied as input to the system.
You are affected if hcode version 2.1 or lower is present and your system processes mail data through the putSDN() function in mail.c.
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 dataUpgrade hcode to a version beyond 2.1 that includes the patch, or implement input validation and bounds checking in the putSDN() function to ensure buffer lengths are validated before copy operations.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-34020 — 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-2024-34020 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