CVE-2024-36262
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 · uneditedRace condition in some Intel(R) System Security Report and System Resources Defense firmware may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
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 race condition vulnerability in Intel System Security Report and System Resources Defense firmware allows a privileged user with local access to potentially escalate their privileges. The race condition occurs in the timing window between operations, enabling a local attacker who already has privileged access to gain higher privileges.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Identify Intel System Security Report or System Resources Defense presenceCheck if Intel System Security Report or System Resources Defense firmware/components are installed on the system. On Windows, review installed programs or system info. On Linux, check dmesg, dmidecode, or Intel-specific utilities. Look for Intel security-related firmware or software packages.Affected if The Intel System Security Report or System Resources Defense firmware component is present on the system
-
Determine firmware versionUse Intel system information tools, BIOS/UEFI interfaces, or platform-specific commands to retrieve the firmware version for System Security Report and System Resources Defense. Compare against any Intel-published fixed versions when available.Affected if The installed firmware version matches or predates the vulnerable version range when Intel publishes version guidance
-
Verify local privileged access existsCheck for local administrator or root accounts that could potentially exploit this flaw. On Windows: 'net user' or Computer Management. On Linux: 'sudo -l' or review /etc/sudoers and /etc/group for privileged users.Affected if There are multiple local privileged users or the system relies on local accounts rather than domain-based authentication
-
Assess physical access environmentDetermine if the system is in a location where unauthorized local physical access is possible. Check if console access is protected, boot media is secured, and physical security policies are enforced.Affected if The system has insufficient physical access controls, allowing untrusted individuals local access
A user is affected if their system has Intel System Security Report or System Resources Defense firmware installed and supports local privileged user access, as the race condition requires a privileged local attacker to exploit the timing window.
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 the Intel firmware update for System Security Report and System Resources Defense when available. Restrict local physical access and limit the number of privileged users until the patch is deployed.
- 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-2024-36262 — 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-2024-36262 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