Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
- EPSS is 0.18% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2024
CVE-2024-25724High confidence
n/a — Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')
Unknown · Unknown
7.3HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:Medium, lowered one band.downgradedsince 27 Aug 2025
Compensating controls
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Unknown and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
In RTI Connext Professional 5.3.1 through 6.1.0 before 6.1.1, a buffer overflow in XML parsing from Routing Service, Recording Service, Queuing Service, and Cloud Discovery Service allows attackers to execute code with the affected service's privileges, compromise the service's integrity, leak sensitive information, or crash the service. These attacks could be done via a remote malicious RTPS message; a compromised call with malicious parameters to the RTI_RoutingService_new, rti::recording::Service, RTI_QueuingService_new, or RTI_CDS_Service_new public APIs; or a compromised local file system containing a malicious XML file.
What
In RTI Connext Professional 5.3.1 through 6.1.0 before 6.1.1, a buffer overflow in XML parsing from Routing Service, Recording Service, Queuing Service, and Cloud Discovery Service allows attackers to execute code with the affected service's privileges, compromise the service's integrity, leak sensitive information, or crash the service. These attacks could be done via a remote malicious RTPS message; a compromised call with malicious parameters to the RTI_RoutingService_new, rti::recording::Service, RTI_QueuingService_new, or RTI_CDS_Service_new public APIs; or a compromised local file system containing a malicious XML file.
Why
The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
What
In RTI Connext Professional 5.3.1 through 6.1.0 before 6.1.1, a buffer overflow in XML parsing from Routing Service, Recording Service, Queuing Service, and Cloud Discovery Service allows attackers to execute code with the affected service's privileges, compromise the service's integrity, leak sensitive information, or crash the service. These attacks could be done via a remote malicious RTPS message; a compromised call with malicious parameters to the RTI_RoutingService_new, rti::recording::Service, RTI_QueuingService_new, or RTI_CDS_Service_new public APIs; or a compromised local file system containing a malicious XML file.
Why
The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- local access → Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') → execute code or commands in the affected security context
- Attack surface
- Local
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-120 ↗
CWE-120: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow'). The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AC:L/AV:L/A:H/C:L/I:H/PR:L/S:U/UI:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- connext dds professional: 5.3.1 ≤ 6.1.0
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 21 May 2024 · Last source change 27 Aug 2025, 15:41 UTC · CWE-120 · Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-23034
Product sourceUnavailable
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCISA ADP
NVD statusNVD enriched
Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.