Arista NG Firewall 17.1.1 ExecManagerImpl os command injection
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 7.7 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Arista NG Firewall 17.1.1. This impacts the function ExecManagerImpl. This manipulation causes os command injection.
This vulnerability is registered as CVE-2024-12829. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Arista NG Firewall 17.1.1. Affected by this vulnerability is the function ExecManagerImpl. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a os command injection vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-78. The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Arista NG Firewall ExecManagerImpl Command Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Arista NG Firewall. Authentication is required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the ExecManagerImpl class. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of a user-supplied string before using it to execute a system call. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-24015.
The advisory is shared at zerodayinitiative.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2024-12829 since 12/19/2024. The exploitation appears to be easy. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploitation requires an enhanced level of successful authentication. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 01/04/2025). MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1202 for this issue.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
License
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.7VulDB Meta Temp Score: 7.7
VulDB Base Score: 7.2
VulDB Temp Score: 7.0
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 8.8
NVD Vector: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 7.2
CNA Vector (zdi): 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Os command injectionCWE: CWE-78 / CWE-77 / CWE-74
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
12/19/2024 🔍12/20/2024 🔍
12/20/2024 🔍
01/04/2025 🔍
Sources
Advisory: ZDI-24-1717Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2024-12829 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2024-12829
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-289045
Entry
Created: 12/20/2024 07:40Updated: 01/04/2025 03:19
Changes: 12/20/2024 07:40 (64), 01/04/2025 03:19 (14)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216:DC4:103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.