CVE-2024-41921
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 code injection vulnerability has been discovered in the Robot Operating System (ROS) 'rostopic' command-line tool, affecting ROS distributions Noetic Ninjemys and earlier. The vulnerability lies in the 'echo' verb, which allows a user to introspect a ROS topic and accepts a user-provided Python expression via the --filter option. This input is passed directly to the eval() function without sanitization, allowing a local user to craft and execute arbitrary code.
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 ROS 'rostopic' tool's echo verb passes the --filter option input directly to Python's eval() without sanitization, allowing local users to execute arbitrary code via crafted Python expressions.
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= indigo_igloo= kinetic_kame= melodic_morenia= noetic_ninjemysCVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify your ROS distribution versionRun 'rosversion -d' or check /opt/ros/*/setup.bash for the distribution nameAffected if The output is one of: indigo_igloo, kinetic_kame, melodic_morenia, or noetic_ninjemys
-
Verify rostopic tool is installedRun 'which rostopic' or 'rostopic -h'Affected if The rostopic command executes and shows help output
-
Confirm the --filter option existsRun 'rostopic echo --help' and look for --filter in the options listAffected if The --filter option is present in the help output
-
Check if --filter is actually being used in your environmentSearch your scripts, launch files, or command history for usages of 'rostopic echo --filter'Affected if You find active use of --filter with rostopic echo
Your environment is affected if you are running any of the four listed ROS distributions (indigo_igloo, kinetic_kame, melodic_morenia, noetic_ninjemys) AND the rostopic tool with the --filter option is installed and in use.
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 · scopedReplace eval() with a safe evaluation method such as ast.literal_eval() for simple expressions, or implement a restricted sandbox/allowlist for permitted operations while preserving the tool's legitimate introspection capabilities.
- Do not use the --filter option with rostopic echo, as it passes input directly to eval() without sanitization
- If filtering is required, pipe rostopic output to external tools like grep, awk, or Python scripts that process data safely after retrieval
- Consider migrating to ROS 2, which does not have this vulnerability and is the actively maintained distribution
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-41921 — 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-2024-41921 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