CVE-2022-24952 in Eternal Terminal
Summary
by MITRE • 08/16/2022
Several denial of service vulnerabilities exist in Eternal Terminal prior to version 6.2.0, including a DoS triggered remotely by an invalid sequence number and a local bug triggered by invalid input sent directly to the IPC socket.
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 05/05/2026
The Eternal Terminal project represents a modern remote terminal solution designed to provide secure and efficient remote access capabilities. This vulnerability analysis focuses on CVE-2022-24952 which affects versions prior to 6.2.0 and exposes critical denial of service conditions that can compromise system availability. The vulnerability landscape for Eternal Terminal reveals significant operational risks when deployed in production environments where system reliability is paramount. These issues manifest through two distinct attack vectors that demonstrate the complexity of securing modern terminal solutions.
The primary remote vulnerability stems from improper validation of sequence numbers within the network protocol implementation. When an attacker sends malformed sequence number values to a vulnerable Eternal Terminal instance, the system fails to properly handle these invalid inputs and subsequently crashes or becomes unresponsive. This represents a classic buffer over-read condition where the application attempts to process sequence numbers beyond expected ranges. The vulnerability aligns with CWE-129 which addresses insufficient validation of length fields and CWE-125 which covers out-of-bounds read conditions. From an attack perspective, this vulnerability can be exploited from any network location that can establish a connection to the target service, making it particularly dangerous in exposed environments.
A secondary local vulnerability exists within the inter-process communication mechanism of Eternal Terminal. When invalid input is sent directly to the IPC socket interface, the application experiences a similar denial of service condition. This local variant demonstrates how the same underlying validation issues affect different communication pathways within the application architecture. The IPC socket handling reveals potential weaknesses in the application's input sanitization processes and suggests broader architectural concerns regarding proper resource management. This vulnerability type maps to CWE-704 which covers incorrect type conversion or cast operations and CWE-707 which addresses improper neutralization of special elements used in a different syntax.
The operational impact of these vulnerabilities extends beyond simple service disruption to potentially compromise entire remote access infrastructures. Organizations relying on Eternal Terminal for critical operations face significant risks when these vulnerabilities remain unpatched, as attackers can systematically target availability through either remote or local exploitation methods. The combination of these vulnerabilities creates a comprehensive attack surface that can be leveraged by threat actors to degrade service availability. Network defenders must consider these vulnerabilities in their risk assessment frameworks, particularly when evaluating the security posture of terminal access solutions.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2022-24952 require immediate patching to version 6.2.0 or later where the vulnerabilities have been addressed. Organizations should implement network segmentation to limit exposure of Eternal Terminal services to untrusted networks and deploy monitoring solutions to detect anomalous sequence number patterns or IPC socket communications. The ATT&CK framework categorizes these vulnerabilities under T1499 which covers network denial of service and T1566 which addresses credential access through network service exploitation. Additional defensive measures include implementing rate limiting on network connections, deploying intrusion detection systems to monitor for exploitation attempts, and conducting regular security assessments of terminal access solutions. System administrators should also consider implementing automated patch management processes to ensure timely remediation of similar vulnerabilities in the future.