CVE-2024-52912
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 · uneditedBitcoin Core before 0.21.0 allows a network split that is resultant from an integer overflow (calculating the time offset for newly connecting peers) and an abs64 logic bug.
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 confidenceBitcoin Core before 0.21.0 contains an integer overflow vulnerability in the time offset calculation for newly connecting peers, combined with an abs64 logic bug. These flaws can cause a network split where nodes reach inconsistent consensus about blockchain state, effectivelyforking the network.
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< 0.21.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed Bitcoin Core versionRun `bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo` or `bitcoind --version` to retrieve the running Bitcoin Core versionAffected if Version is below 0.21.0 (e.g., 0.20.x, 0.19.x, etc.)
-
Verify peer time handling is activeBitcoin Core enables peer time offset calculations by default. Check that the node is accepting inbound or making outbound connections. Run `bitcoin-cli getpeerinfo` to confirm active peers existAffected if Node has active peers and is running an affected version
-
Confirm network exposureReview node configuration via `bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo` to confirm `onion` or `i2p` bindings are not exclusively used (these still participate in time offset calculations)Affected if Node has any external network exposure (IPv4, IPv6, Tor) and runs an affected version
The node is affected if it runs Bitcoin Core version below 0.21.0 and participates in the peer-to-peer network with time-aware connections.
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 · scoped0.21.0
Upgrade Bitcoin Core to version 0.21.0 or later to obtain the patched version that fixes the integer overflow and abs64 logic bug in peer time offset calculations.
Bitcoin Core 0.21.0 or later
- 1. Backup your Bitcoin Core data directory and wallet files before making any changes
- 2. Stop the running Bitcoin Core daemon or GUI application
- 3. Download Bitcoin Core version 0.21.0 or later from the official source at bitcoincore.org
- 4. Verify the downloaded binary using the provided SHA256 checksums and GPG signatures
- 5. Install or replace the existing Bitcoin Core binaries with the new version
- 6. Restart Bitcoin Core and verify it is running the updated version using `bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo` or the GUI debug window
- 7. Monitor logs for any errors during startup and initial block synchronization
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-52912 — 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-2024-52912 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