CVE-2024-57672
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 · uneditedAn issue in floodlight v1.2 allows a local attacker to cause a denial of service via the Topology Manager module, Topologylnstance module, Routing module.
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 local attacker can cause denial of service in floodlight v1.2 by exploiting vulnerabilities in the Topology Manager, TopologyInstance, and Routing modules. The attack requires local access to the system where floodlight is running.
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= 1.2CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 if Floodlight is installedCheck for Floodlight processes running on the system (e.g., ps aux | grep -i floodlight, or look for floodlight-related services)Affected if Floodlight process is running on the system
-
Check the installed Floodlight versionLocate the floodlight installation and check the version file or jar manifest, typically found in the installation directory or through the package managerAffected if The version is exactly 1.2
-
Verify Topology Manager module is activeInspect the floodlight configuration files (typically floodlightdefault.properties or module configuration) to see if org.projectfloodlight.module.core.modules.TopologyManager or similar topology module is listed as enabledAffected if Topology Manager module is enabled in the configuration
-
Verify TopologyInstance module is activeCheck the module configuration for org.projectfloodlight.module.core.modules.TopologyInstance or similar topology instance componentAffected if TopologyInstance module is enabled in the configuration
-
Verify Routing module is activeExamine the configuration for routing-related modules such as org.projectfloodlight.module.core.modules.Routing or similar routing componentsAffected if Routing module is enabled in the configuration
-
Confirm local access to the systemReview system access controls and verify who has local access to the machine running FloodlightAffected if Untrusted users have local shell access to the Floodlight host
User is affected if Floodlight version 1.2 is running with any of the Topology Manager, TopologyInstance, or Routing modules enabled, and untrusted users have local access to the system.
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 dataRestrict local access to systems running floodlight and implement proper resource limits and error handling in the affected Topology Manager, TopologyInstance, and Routing modules to prevent DoS conditions.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-57672 — 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-2024-57672 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