CVE-2024-9413
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 · uneditedThe transport_message_handler function in SCP-Firmware release versions 2.11.0-2.15.0 does not properly handle errors, potentially allowing an Application Processor (AP) to cause a buffer overflow in System Control Processor (SCP) firmware.
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 confidenceThe transport_message_handler function in SCP-Firmware versions 2.11.0-2.15.0 contains improper error handling that could allow an Application Processor (AP) to trigger a buffer overflow in System Control Processor firmware. The vulnerability exists in the message transport layer where error conditions from incoming messages are not properly validated before being processed, potentially leading to memory corruption.
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>= 2.11.0, < 2.16.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 SCP-Firmware presenceLocate SCP-Firmware on the system by checking system documentation, firmware images, SBOM (Software Bill of Materials), or platform firmware inventory. Look for files or components named 'scp_firmware', 'scp', or 'system control processor' firmware in firmware directories, bootloader configs, or platform manifests.Affected if Arm SCP Firmware is found on the system
-
Determine SCP-Firmware versionQuery the installed SCP-Firmware version through system interfaces such as IPMI, redfish, or platform-specific tools (e.g., 'ipmitool fru', 'dmidecode', or vendor-specific firmware management utilities). Check firmware image metadata, version strings in firmware binaries, or platform management interfaces.Affected if The version cannot be determined or is not documented
-
Compare version to affected rangeIf a version is obtained, verify it falls within >= 2.11.0 and < 2.16.0. This includes versions 2.11.0, 2.11.1, 2.12.0, 2.13.0, 2.14.0, 2.15.0, and any point releases in between.Affected if Installed version is 2.11.0 through 2.15.x (any version >= 2.11.0 but < 2.16.0)
-
Check for message transport usageVerify the system uses the message transport layer between Application Processor and SCP. This may be indicated by inter-processor communication configs, SCP message handling modules, or AP-to-SCP communication paths enabled in the firmware build.Affected if Message transport between AP and SCP is enabled or configured
The environment is affected if Arm SCP Firmware version 2.11.0 through 2.15.x is installed and the system uses AP-to-SCP message transport functionality.
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 · scoped2.16.0
Upgrade SCP-Firmware to version 2.16.0 or later where the error handling has been corrected. If immediate patching is not feasible, implement network segmentation to restrict untrusted AP communications and monitor for anomalous SCP firmware behavior.
SCP-Firmware version 2.16.0 or later
- Identify the current SCP-Firmware version in use by checking the firmware manifest or system documentation
- Obtain SCP-Firmware version 2.16.0 or later from the official Arm developer repository at developer.arm.com
- Follow the standard SCP-Firmware upgrade procedure for your specific platform, ensuring a validated backup is available
- After upgrade, verify the transport_message_handler function is updated and no longer vulnerable to the buffer overflow
- Test the system to ensure normal SCP/AP communication functions correctly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $13,312.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-9413 — 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-2024-9413 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