CVE-2024-4640
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 · uneditedOnCell G3470A-LTE Series firmware versions v1.7.7 and prior have been identified as vulnerable due to missing bounds checking on buffer operations. An attacker could write past the boundaries of allocated buffer regions in memory, causing a program crash.
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 confidenceOnCell G3470A-LTE Series industrial cellular gateways running firmware v1.7.7 and prior contain a buffer overflow vulnerability caused by missing bounds checking during buffer operations. An attacker can write beyond allocated memory regions, potentially causing denial of service through program crashes or potentially achieving arbitrary code execution.
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<= 1.7.7<= 1.7.7<= 1.7.7<= 1.7.7CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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 modelAccess the device web interface or CLI and locate the model number in the system information or status page. Look for 'OnCell G3470A-LTE' or variants (US, EU, US-T, EU-T).Affected if The device model is Moxa OnCell G3470A-LTE Series (any regional variant).
-
Check the firmware versionIn the device web interface, navigate to System > Status or System Information. Alternatively, via CLI, use the command 'show system-info' or 'version' to retrieve the firmware version.Affected if The displayed firmware version is 1.7.7 or lower.
-
Verify the vulnerable version rangeCompare the installed firmware version against the affected range <= 1.7.7. Note the exact version number displayed.Affected if The firmware version is 1.7.7 or any version lower than 1.7.7.
-
Assess management interface exposureCheck network configuration to determine if the device management interface (HTTP/HTTPS, SSH, or telnet) is exposed to untrusted networks. Review firewall rules, ACLs, or VLAN segmentation surrounding the device.Affected if The management interface is accessible from untrusted or external networks.
The device is affected if it is an OnCell G3470A-LTE Series gateway running firmware version 1.7.7 or lower, and the management interface is accessible (which enables the attack vector).
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 vendor-supplied firmware update newer than v1.7.7. If no patched firmware is available, implement network segmentation and restrict access to management interfaces to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,608.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-4640 — 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-2024-4640 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