CVE-2024-43390
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 low privileged remote attacker can perform configuration changes of the firewall services, including packet forwarding or NAT through the FW_NAT.IN_IP environment variable which can lead to a DoS.
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 low-privileged remote attacker can manipulate firewall configuration through the FW_NAT.IN_IP environment variable to modify packet forwarding or NAT settings, causing denial of service. The vulnerability stems from improper handling of environment variables in firewall service configuration.
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< 8.9.3< 8.9.3< 8.9.3< 8.9.3< 8.9.3< 8.9.3< 8.9.3< 8.9.3CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 the device model and firmware versionAccess the MGuard web interface or CLI and navigate to System > Firmware or use the 'show version' command in the console. Alternatively, check the firmware file name if you have access to the firmware update package.Affected if The device is a TC MGuard RS2000 or RS4000 series (any variant: 4G VZW, 4G, 4G ATT, 3G) and the firmware version is below 8.9.3
-
Verify if the firewall NAT service is activeAccess the MGuard CLI or web interface and check the firewall/NAT service status. In CLI, use 'show firewall' or 'show nat' commands depending on available options.Affected if The firewall service with NAT functionality is enabled and processing the FW_NAT.IN_IP environment variable
-
Inspect for unexpected firewall or NAT rule modificationsReview current NAT and packet forwarding rules through the MGuard web interface under Firewall > NAT or via CLI commands like 'show ip nat translations' or equivalent. Compare against known-good baseline configurations.Affected if Unexpected NAT rules exist, particularly rules using environment variable-derived IP addresses that were not explicitly configured by an administrator
A user is affected if they are running a TC MGuard RS2000 or RS4000 series device with firmware version below 8.9.3 and the firewall NAT service is processing the FW_NAT.IN_IP environment variable.
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 · scoped8.9.3
Restrict privileges for users managing firewall services, implement strict input validation on environment variables, and disable or sandbox environment variable processing for firewall configuration to prevent unauthorized modifications.
Firmware version 8.9.3 or later for TC Mguard RS2000/RS4000 series (all carrier variants)
- 1. Identify the specific TC Mguard model (RS2000 or RS4000) and carrier variant (VZW, ATT, 3G, or 4G) in use
- 2. Download the firmware version 8.9.3 or later from the official Tc Mguard vendor support portal or cert.vde.com reference
- 3. Access the device management interface through a secure, trusted network connection
- 4. Navigate to the firmware upgrade section in the device administration panel
- 5. Upload and apply the firmware version 8.9.3 or later
- 6. Verify the upgrade was successful by confirming the new firmware version in the device status
- 7. After upgrade, validate that firewall services, NAT, and packet forwarding configurations function correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-43390 — 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-2024-43390 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