CVE-2024-28183
No source can show you its own past. This one can.
Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.
Anti Rollback bypass with physical access and TOCTOU attack
rank 19 = 0 + 14 + 0 + 5 + 0
rank@v1 · backlog
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.00223 · without this subject the record ranks 19
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 5.7, from NVD · without this subject the record ranks 5
It is getting worse, not staying still
FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed
no persisting rise in 365 days · without this subject the record ranks 19
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
4 products in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 14
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 19
$9,810 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.8814887365328109 exposure x 0.00223 likelihood
udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run
$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.
Hindsight · the state
Foresight · where to check next
This record is one instance of CWE-367, time-of-check time-of-use (toctou) race condition. The index holds 833 prior instances of this class, 6 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. taxonomy@v1
Sources disagree here.
Both shown, dated. We don't pick winners. disagreement-rules@v1
Running espressif esp-idf? Check your version
A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.
Watch this record
Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.
Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)
Record your call
Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.
AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigatedChoose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.
Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.
Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness
Written for the ticket you're about to file.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score
Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.
- RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
- RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
- RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
- RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known
A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.
Attack path
What it is stated by the CNA
ESP-IDF is the development framework for Espressif SoCs supported on Windows, Linux and macOS. A Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) vulnerability was discovered in the implementation of the ESP-IDF bootloader which could allow an attacker with physical access to flash of the device to bypass anti-rollback protection. Anti-rollback prevents rollback to application with security version lower than one programmed in eFuse of chip. This attack can allow to boot past (passive) application partition having lower security version of the same device even in the presence of the flash encryption scheme. receipt
Read the rest of the CNA's description
The attack requires carefully modifying the flash contents after the anti-rollback checks have been performed by the bootloader (before loading the application). The vulnerability is fixed in 4.4.7 and 5.2.1.
NVD's analysis a second authority
- severity
- 5.7 CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
- weakness
- CWE-367
- affected versions
- espressif esp-idf 4.4.6; espressif esp-idf 5.0.6; espressif esp-idf 5.1.3; and 1 more, listed in full below
- also scored by
- [email protected] 6.1 CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
The CNA scored it 6.1 and NVD 5.7. Both are shown because both were published; we do not pick one.
check it yourself github.com github.com github.com github.com github.com github.com +2 morereceipt
Movement the material steps
This score more than doubled inside 72 hours. Both observations are in the full history below.
Show all 21 observations
21 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt
The full biography
Exploit probability more than doubled between 2025-03-17 and 2025-03-19 (0.00113 → 0.0161) and the record had been public for 2 years, 5 months when this index was last written.
The pattern, elsewhere
This record is one instance of CWE-367, time-of-check time-of-use (toctou) race condition. The index holds 833 prior instances of this class, 6 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. [email protected]
"Matches n of m" counts the attributes the two records can both be compared on: the CVSS metrics they share a version of, any weakness class beyond this one, and the vendor. fit-rules@v1
833 records in this class held. The six above are drawn from the ones CISA has listed as exploited, ranked by how much of the record matches this one. That is why every one of them is KEV-listed: the pool is, so the colour on those spokes says nothing the pool has not already said.
No curated product neighbourhood is held for this product, so the records above are the nearest this index can name. The neighbourhood table covers a small set of products and is extended by hand.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
None. No alias set, and nothing in the corpus cites this identifier or shares its product family within 60 days.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2024-28183.
What usually comes next
Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.