Improper Access ControlWeakness · CWE-284

CVE-2024-47975

HIGH · 7.0 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-10-07
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
73/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges

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
Improper access control validation in firmware of some Solidigm DC Products may allow an attacker with physical access to gain unauthorized access or an attacker with local access to potentially enable denial of service.

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

Improper access control validation in Solidigm DC product firmware allows an attacker with physical access to potentially gain unauthorized access to the storage system, while an attacker with local access may be able to trigger a denial of service condition.

MitigationApply vendor-provided firmware updates from Solidigm for affected DC products and enforce physical security controls on data center infrastructure to prevent unauthorized physical access.

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
Physical
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

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 Solidigm DC storage devices in the environment
    Use storage enclosure or RAID controller management tools (e.g., `lsiutil`, `storcli`, or vendor-specific storage utilities) to enumerate all connected storage devices. Look for Solidigm-branded devices or check system inventory with `lspci | grep -i solidigm` or vendor management interfaces.
    Affected if Solidigm DC product firmware is present in the system inventory or device list
  2. Retrieve the current firmware version of Solidigm DC devices
    Query the firmware version via the storage controller management interface, SMART data, or vendor-specific CLI tools (e.g., `solidigm-cli`, `lsiutil -a -i`, or through BMC/IPMI storage health reports). Record the firmware version string.
    Affected if The installed firmware version matches or falls within an affected version range (compare against Solidigm advisories for CVE-2024-47975)
  3. Assess physical access controls on data center infrastructure
    Inspect the physical security posture of the rack or enclosure housing the Solidigm DC storage. Verify access control mechanisms (lockable cabinets, restricted area badges, CCTV) are in place. Check whether unauthorized physical access to the storage device ports or enclosure is possible.
    Affected if Physical access to the storage device is not restricted or is publicly/uncontrolled
  4. Evaluate local user access and privilege boundaries
    Review local user accounts, group memberships, and privilege escalation controls on the host system connected to the Solidigm DC storage. Check for untrusted local users or processes that could interact with the storage management interface.
    Affected if Untrusted or unprivileged local users have access to the system hosting the Solidigm DC storage device

A user is affected if a Solidigm DC product with vulnerable firmware is present AND either physical access to the device is uncontrolled OR untrusted local users can access the storage system.

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
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor-provided firmware updates from Solidigm for affected DC products and enforce physical security controls on data center infrastructure to prevent unauthorized physical access.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47975 — 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-2024-47975 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