CVE-2024-5535

CRITICALNVD 9.19.1
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 9.1 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2024-06-27. NVD baseline CVSS 9.1; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 4 sources updated this weekElevated
9.1EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Public exploit or proof-of-concept code is available
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 5.6%CVSS: 9.1Exploit: Public PoCExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Issue summary: Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto with an empty supported client protocols buffer may cause a crash or memory contents to be sent to the peer.

Impact summary: A buffer overread can have a range of potential consequences such as unexpected application beahviour or a crash. In particular this issue could result in up to 255 bytes of arbitrary private data from memory being sent to the peer leading to a loss of confidentiality. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_select_next_proto function with a 0 length list of supported client protocols are affected by this issue. This would normally never be a valid scenario and is typically not under attacker control but may occur by accident in the case of a configuration or programming error in the calling application.

The OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto is typically used by TLS applications that support ALPN (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation) or NPN (Next Protocol Negotiation). NPN is older, was never standardised and is deprecated in favour of ALPN. We believe that ALPN is significantly more widely deployed than NPN. The SSL_select_next_proto function accepts a list of protocols from the server and a list of protocols from the client and returns the first protocol that appears in the server list that also appears in the client list. In the case of no overlap between the two lists it returns the first item in the client list. In either case it will signal whether an overlap between the two lists was found. In the case where SSL_select_next_proto is called with a zero length client list it fails to notice this condition and returns the memory immediately following the client list pointer (and reports that there was no overlap in the lists).

This function is typically called from a server side application callback for ALPN or a client side application callback for NPN. In the case of ALPN the list of protocols supplied by the client is guaranteed by libssl to never be zero in length. The list of server protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. In this case if the SSL_select_next_proto function has been called as expected (with the list supplied by the client passed in the client/client_len parameters), then the application will not be vulnerable to this issue. If the application has accidentally been configured with a zero length server list, and has accidentally passed that zero length server list in the client/client_len parameters, and has additionally failed to correctly handle a "no overlap" response (which would normally result in a handshake failure in ALPN) then it will be vulnerable to this problem.

In the case of NPN, the protocol permits the client to opportunistically select a protocol when there is no overlap. OpenSSL returns the first client protocol in the no overlap case in support of this. The list of client protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. However if the SSL_select_next_proto function is accidentally called with a client_len of 0 then an invalid memory pointer will be returned instead. If the application uses this output as the opportunistic protocol then the loss of confidentiality will occur.

This issue has been assessed as Low severity because applications are most likely to be vulnerable if they are using NPN instead of ALPN - but NPN is not widely used. It also requires an application configuration or programming error. Finally, this issue would not typically be under attacker control making active exploitation unlikely.

The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.

Due to the low severity of this issue we are not issuing new releases of OpenSSL at this time. The fix will be included in the next releases when they become available.

CVSS v3
9.1
EG Score
9.1CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
72
EG Risk 72/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity91% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation40% × 40%
EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
5.6%
EPSS %ILE
92nd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.1 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
5.6% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-19). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

June 27, 2024

Last Modified

October 15, 2026

Advisory Details (10)

Auto-updated Aug 1, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_commit.
Web page

oss-security - Re: feedback requested regarding deprecation of TLS 1.0/1.1

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/08/15/1
Web page

oss-security - Fwd: [Security-announce][CVE-2024-5642] Buffer over-read in SSLContext.set_npn_protocols() for Python 3.9 and earlier

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/06/28/4
Web page

oss-security - CVE-2024-5535: OpenSSL: SSL_select_next_proto buffer overread

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/06/27/1
GitHub commit

commit e86ac436f0bd (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit e86ac436f0bd — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/e86ac436f0bd54d4517745483e2315650fae7b2c
GitHub commit

commit cf6f91f6121f (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit cf6f91f6121f — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/cf6f91f6121f4db167405db2f0de410a456f260c
GitHub commit

commit 99fb785a5f85 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 99fb785a5f85 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/99fb785a5f85315b95288921a321a935ea29a51e
GitHub commit

commit 4ada436a1946 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 4ada436a1946 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/4ada436a1946cbb24db5ab4ca082b69c1bc10f37

Patch Availability(13)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntuqemu-efi-riscv64 (2025.02-3ubuntu2.2) @ plucky2026-10-20ubuntu
ubuntuopenssl (3.0.13-0ubuntu3.2) @ noble2026-10-20ubuntu
ubuntuopenssl (1.0.2g-1ubuntu4.20+esm18) @ xenial2026-10-20ubuntu
redhatopenssl-0:1.0.1e-61.el6_10.12026-09-11redhat
redhatmingw-openssl-0:1.0.2k-4.el8_102026-08-26redhat
redhatopenssl-1:1.0.2k-26.el7_9.22026-08-24redhat
redhatopenssl-1:3.0.7-29.el9_42025-04-08redhat
redhatopenssl2025-04-02redhat
redhatjbcs-httpd24-openssl-1:1.1.1k-19.el7jbcs2025-04-02redhat
redhatmysql-0:8.0.41-2.el9_52025-02-19redhat
redhatmysql:8.0-8100020250212154709.489197e62025-02-19redhat
redhatopenssl-1:3.2.2-6.el9_52024-11-12redhat
redhatopenssl-1:1.1.1k-14.el8_62024-10-09redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(12 across 12 ecosystems)
Alpine:v3.17(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.0.14-r0: fixed in 3.0.14-r0
—
Alpine:v3.18(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.1.6-r0: fixed in 3.1.6-r0
—
Alpine:v3.19(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.1.6-r0: fixed in 3.1.6-r0
—
Alpine:v3.20(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.1-r1: fixed in 3.3.1-r1
—
Alpine:v3.21(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.1-r1: fixed in 3.3.1-r1
—
Alpine:v3.22(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.1-r1: fixed in 3.3.1-r1
—
Alpine:v3.23(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.1-r1: fixed in 3.3.1-r1
—
Alpine:v3.24(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.1-r1: fixed in 3.3.1-r1
—
Debian:11(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl1.1.1k-1 ... 1.1.1w-0~deb11u1 (17 versions)
  • every version up to 1.1.1n-0+deb11u6: fixed in 1.1.1n-0+deb11u6
  • every version up to 1.1.1w-0+deb11u2: fixed in 1.1.1w-0+deb11u2
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl3.0.10-1 ... 3.0.9-1 (12 versions)
  • every version up to 3.0.15-1~deb12u1: fixed in 3.0.15-1~deb12u1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.2-1: fixed in 3.3.2-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • every version up to 3.3.2-1: fixed in 3.3.2-1
—

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Additional Vendor Advisories

(3)

Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 30× in last 7d / 58× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 95 of 230 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 5 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 135 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-10-20 03:17 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-20 03:17 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-10-20 03:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  4. 2026-10-19 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  5. 2026-10-19 03:31 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-19 03:31 UTCVendor advisory
  7. 2026-10-19 03:30 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  8. 2026-10-18 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  9. 2026-10-18 03:45 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-18 03:45 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-18 03:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  12. 2026-10-17 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  13. 2026-10-17 03:59 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-17 03:59 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-10-17 03:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  16. 2026-10-16 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  17. 2026-10-16 04:14 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-16 04:14 UTCVendor advisory
  19. 2026-10-16 04:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  20. 2026-10-15 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  21. 2026-10-15 01:27 UTCVendor advisory
  22. 2026-10-15 01:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  23. 2026-10-15 01:07 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-10-15 01:07 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-10-15 01:07 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
Show 70 more
  1. 2026-10-14 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  2. 2026-10-14 13:00 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-14 13:00 UTCVendor advisory
  4. 2026-10-14 12:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  5. 2026-10-13 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  6. 2026-10-13 12:52 UTCVendor advisory
  7. 2026-10-13 12:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  8. 2026-10-12 17:38 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-12 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  10. 2026-10-12 13:06 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-12 13:05 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4fc7-mvrr-wv2c · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  12. 2026-10-11 21:03 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-11 15:55 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-11 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  15. 2026-10-10 19:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  16. 2026-10-09 20:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  17. 2026-10-08 17:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  18. 2026-10-07 23:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  19. 2026-10-07 10:35 UTCOSV refresh
  20. 2026-10-06 15:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  21. 2026-10-05 17:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  22. 2026-10-04 23:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  23. 2026-10-03 14:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  24. 2026-10-02 16:23 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-01 19:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  26. 2026-09-30 15:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  27. 2026-09-28 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  28. 2026-09-27 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  29. 2026-09-26 15:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  30. 2026-09-24 14:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  31. 2026-09-23 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  32. 2026-09-22 14:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  33. 2026-09-20 20:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  34. 2026-09-18 19:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  35. 2026-09-17 16:36 UTCOSV refresh
  36. 2026-09-16 14:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  37. 2026-09-16 05:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  38. 2026-09-15 03:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  39. 2026-09-13 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  40. 2026-09-12 14:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  41. 2026-09-11 14:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  42. 2026-09-11 09:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  43. 2026-09-10 09:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  44. 2026-09-08 21:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  45. 2026-09-07 16:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  46. 2026-09-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  47. 2026-09-04 13:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  48. 2026-09-04 05:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  49. 2026-09-02 14:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  50. 2026-09-01 13:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  51. 2026-08-30 19:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  52. 2026-08-30 01:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  53. 2026-08-29 16:43 UTCOSV refresh
  54. 2026-08-28 21:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  55. 2026-08-27 14:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  56. 2026-08-26 14:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  57. 2026-08-25 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  58. 2026-08-24 14:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  59. 2026-08-23 00:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  60. 2026-08-21 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  61. 2026-08-20 22:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  62. 2026-08-19 17:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  63. 2026-08-18 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  64. 2026-08-16 14:55 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  65. 2026-08-16 02:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  66. 2026-08-15 01:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  67. 2026-08-13 21:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  68. 2026-08-13 04:00 UTCOSV refresh
  69. 2026-08-12 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile
  70. 2026-08-11 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 5.6% · 92nd percentile

Publicly available exploits

(1 reference)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (1 GitHub PoC). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.

  • GitHub PoCwebsecnl/CVE-2024-5535
    Published Mar 15, 2025

    PoC - OpenSSL NPN Buffer Overread

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2024-5535?
CVE-2024-5535 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on June 27, 2024. Issue summary: Calling the OpenSSL API function SSLselectnext_proto with an empty supported client protocols buffer may cause a crash or memory contents to be sent to the peer. Impact summary: A buffer overread can have a range of potential consequences such as unexpected application beahviour or a…
When was CVE-2024-5535 made public?
CVE-2024-5535 was made public on June 26, 2024: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, OpenSSL Software Foundation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on June 27, 2024. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 15, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2024-5535 actively exploited?
CVE-2024-5535 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 5.6% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (92nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-5535?
CVE-2024-5535 has a CVSS v3 base score of 9.1 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2024-5535?
A fix for CVE-2024-5535 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2024-5535 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2024-5535

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2024-5535?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.