Resource Allocation Without LimitsWeakness · CWE-770

CVE-2024-7113

HIGH · 8.7 CVSS v4.0 Published 2024-08-13
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
96/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable 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
If exploited, this vulnerability could cause a SuiteLink server to consume excessive system resources and slow down processing of Data I/O for the duration of the attack.

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

This is a denial-of-service vulnerability in SuiteLink servers where an attacker can cause excessive system resource consumption, leading to slowed Data I/O processing for the entire duration of the attack. The vulnerability allows unauthenticated or authenticated attackers to trigger resource exhaustion, likely through algorithmic complexity manipulation or resource leak exploitation.

MitigationImplement network-level rate limiting and connection throttling on the SuiteLink server; contact the vendor (GE Digital/Honeywell) for the specific patch and hardening guidance; monitor system resource usage for anomalous patterns.

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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

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 SuiteLink servers in your environment
    Locate servers running GE Digital or Honeywell SuiteLink software. Check process lists, running services, or network listeners on common SuiteLink ports (typically TCP 12345 or as configured).
    Affected if You have SuiteLink servers installed and running
  2. Verify network exposure of SuiteLink service
    Review firewall rules and network ACLs to determine if SuiteLink ports are accessible from untrusted networks or the internet. Use netstat or port scanning tools to identify exposed listeners.
    Affected if SuiteLink service is directly accessible from untrusted networks without authentication barriers
  3. Check authentication configuration for SuiteLink
    Examine SuiteLink server configuration files and authentication settings to verify whether unauthenticated connections are permitted or if authentication is enforced.
    Affected if Unauthenticated access is allowed or authentication is not mandatory
  4. Monitor for resource exhaustion indicators
    Track CPU, memory, and network usage patterns on SuiteLink servers. Look for sustained high resource consumption, connection queue buildup, or processing delays.
    Affected if Server shows abnormal resource consumption or degraded Data I/O performance
  5. Review connection limits and throttling configuration
    Inspect SuiteLink configuration for connection limits, thread pool settings, and rate limiting controls. Verify if limits are configured or set to unbounded.
    Affected if Connection limits are absent, set too high, or throttling is disabled

A user is affected if they run SuiteLink servers that are network-accessible with inadequate connection controls or authentication enforcement, leading to observable resource exhaustion or performance degradation.

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

Implement network-level rate limiting and connection throttling on the SuiteLink server; contact the vendor (GE Digital/Honeywell) for the specific patch and hardening guidance; monitor system resource usage for anomalous patterns.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-7113 — 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-2024-7113 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