Classic Buffer OverflowWeakness · CWE-120

CVE-2024-6199

HIGH · 7.7 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-04-25
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
No privileges Zero-click

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
An unauthenticated attacker on the WAN interface, with the ability to intercept Dynamic DNS (DDNS) traffic between DDNS services and the modem, could manipulate specific responses to include code that forces a buffer overflow on the modem. Customers that have not enabled Dynamic DNS on their modem are not vulnerable.

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 · high confidence

An unauthenticated attacker positioned on the WAN interface who can intercept and manipulate Dynamic DNS (DDNS) traffic between the modem and DDNS service providers can inject malicious code into DDNS responses that triggers a buffer overflow on the affected modem. This buffer overflow occurs specifically in the DDNS handling component of the modem's firmware when DDNS is enabled.

MitigationCustomers should disable Dynamic DNS if not actively used, as this eliminates the attack surface entirely. For those requiring DDNS, network segmentation or VPN tunnels should be implemented to protect DDNS traffic from interception on the WAN, and vendor firmware updates should be applied when available.

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
Adjacent
Complexity
High
Privileges
None
Authentication
None
User interaction
None
Scope
N

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:N/AU:N/R:U/V:D/RE:M/U:Red

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. Check if DDNS is enabled on the modem
    Log into the modem's web administration interface or CLI. Navigate to the Dynamic DNS (DDNS) settings section. Verify whether DDNS is currently enabled or configured.
    Affected if DDNS is enabled - the vulnerability only affects modems with DDNS functionality active
  2. Identify the installed firmware version
    Access the modem's admin panel or use CLI commands such as 'show version', 'system info', or 'router status' to retrieve the current firmware version string.
    Affected if Firmware version is unknown or older than vendor-released patches - compare against any available patch information from the vendor
  3. Confirm WAN interface exposure
    Check the modem's network status to determine if the WAN interface has a public IP address and is directly reachable from the internet. Look for 'WAN IP' in the status or connection pages.
    Affected if Modem has a public WAN IP address and DDNS is enabled - this positions an attacker on the WAN as described in the CVE
  4. Inspect DDNS traffic protection
    Examine the DDNS configuration for the provider in use and check if HTTPS or secure update protocols are configured for DDNS communications.
    Affected if DDNS updates use unencrypted HTTP - traffic can be intercepted and manipulated by a WAN-based attacker

The environment is affected if DDNS is enabled on the modem with a public WAN interface and the firmware version is unpatched; disabling DDNS removes the attack surface entirely.

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

Customers should disable Dynamic DNS if not actively used, as this eliminates the attack surface entirely. For those requiring DDNS, network segmentation or VPN tunnels should be implemented to protect DDNS traffic from interception on the WAN, and vendor firmware updates should be applied when available.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,840
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-6199 — 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-2024-6199 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