Powerscale OnefsApplication · Dell

CVE-2024-37132

MEDIUM · 6.7 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-07-02
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 9.5.1.0 / 9.7.1.0 or later.
See remediation →
69/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Zero-click

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 · unedited
Dell PowerScale OneFS versions 8.2.2.x through 9.8.0.0 contain an incorrect privilege assignment vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Denial of service and Elevation of privileges.

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 confidence

Dell PowerScale OneFS versions 8.2.2.x through 9.8.0.0 contains an incorrect privilege assignment vulnerability where a high-privileged local attacker can exploit misconfigured privilege settings to escalate privileges and cause denial of service. The vulnerability stems from improper assignment or validation of user/system privileges in the OneFS operating system.

MitigationUpgrade Dell PowerScale OneFS to a version beyond 9.8.0.0 following Dell's published security advisory, and review user privilege configurations to ensure proper role-based access control settings.

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
Powerscale OnefsApplication
Affected:= 9.8.0.0>= 8.2.2, < 9.5.1.0>= 9.6.0, < 9.7.1.0

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
Low
Privileges
High
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify OneFS version via CLI
    Run `isi version` or `isi status` from the OneFS command line to obtain the exact firmware version installed.
    Affected if Version is 9.8.0.0, or between 8.2.2 and 9.5.1.0 exclusive, or between 9.6.0 and 9.7.1.0 exclusive.
  2. Check RBAC role configurations
    Run `isi auth roles list` to enumerate all defined roles and their permissions. Review each role's privilege set.
    Affected if Any role contains misassigned or excessive privileges that deviate from the principle of least privilege.
  3. Review user-to-role mappings
    Run `isi auth users list` and cross-reference with `isi auth roles list` to identify which users are assigned to high-privilege roles.
    Affected if Users with lower trust levels are assigned to roles with elevated privileges, or administrative users have more permissions than required.
  4. Inspect custom privilege definitions
    Check for any custom privilege entries via `isi auth privileges` or review /etc/ifs/privileges/ custom definitions if accessible.
    Affected if Non-standard or manually defined privileges exist that may be incorrectly assigned.
  5. Audit recent privilege changes
    Review audit logs for changes to RBAC configurations using `isi audit` or check /var/log/ messages for privilege-related modifications.
    Affected if Recent changes to role or privilege configurations are present, especially modifications made by high-privileged accounts.

You are affected if your OneFS version falls within 8.2.2 to 9.5.1.0, 9.6.0 to 9.7.1.0, or equals 9.8.0.0 AND you have RBAC configurations with potentially misassigned privileges.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to 9.5.1.0 / 9.7.1.0 or later
Fixed in 9.5.1.09.7.1.0
Interim mitigation

Upgrade Dell PowerScale OneFS to a version beyond 9.8.0.0 following Dell's published security advisory, and review user privilege configurations to ensure proper role-based access control settings.

Fix this in Powerscale Onefs Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation8.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA8.0 h
44.0 hours of engineering $7,720
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-37132 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-37132 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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