CVE-2024-38443
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 · uneditedC/sorting/binary_insertion_sort.c in The Algorithms - C through e5dad3f has a segmentation fault for deep recursion, which may affect common use cases such as sorting an array of 50 elements.
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 · high confidenceThe binary_insertion_sort.c implementation in The Algorithms - C repository uses recursive function calls that exhaust the stack when sorting arrays of 50 or more elements, causing a segmentation fault. The recursive implementation has O(n) or worse stack depth, which is insufficient for common use cases.
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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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.
-
Locate the binary_insertion_sort.c fileSearch the codebase for files named 'binary_insertion_sort.c' in The Algorithms - C repository or any fork/derivative that includes this sorting implementationAffected if File exists in the environment
-
Verify recursive implementation is presentExamine the source code of binary_insertion_sort.c and look for recursive function calls within the sorting logic (the function calls itself)Affected if The file contains recursive calls that create O(n) or worse stack depth
-
Identify usage with large arraysSearch for code that calls the binary insertion sort function with arrays of 50 or more elements, or examine runtime input sizes being passed to this sortAffected if The sort is being called with arrays containing 50 or more elements
-
Check for segmentation faultsRun tests or applications using binary_insertion_sort with arrays of 50 or more elements and monitor for segmentation faults or stack overflow errors in the logsAffected if Segmentation faults occur when sorting arrays of 50 or more elements
The environment is affected if the recursive binary_insertion_sort.c implementation is present and used to sort arrays of 50 or more elements, causing stack exhaustion and segmentation faults.
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 dataReplace the recursive binary insertion sort implementation with an iterative approach to eliminate stack exhaustion. Verify correctness with arrays of varying sizes including those exceeding 50 elements.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-38443 — 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-2024-38443 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