Answer in brief
CVE-2024-6119 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Possible denial of service in X.509 name checks. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps openssl/openssl (generic), OpenSSL/OpenSSL (generic), Siemens/RUGGEDCOM RST2428P (generic), Siemens/SCALANCE XCM-/XRM-/XCH-/XRH-300 family (generic) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
Answer in brief
CVE-2024-6119 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Possible denial of service in X.509 name checks. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps openssl/openssl (generic), OpenSSL/OpenSSL (generic), Siemens/RUGGEDCOM RST2428P (generic), Siemens/SCALANCE XCM-/XRM-/XCH-/XRH-300 family (generic) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps openssl/openssl (generic), OpenSSL/OpenSSL (generic), Siemens/RUGGEDCOM RST2428P (generic), Siemens/SCALANCE XCM-/XRM-/XCH-/XRH-300 family (generic) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| openssl/opensslgeneric | >=3.3.0 <3.3.2 || >=3.2.0 <3.2.3 || >=3.1.0 <3.1.7 || >=3.0.0 <3.0.15 | 3.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.1.7, 3.0.15 |
| OpenSSL/OpenSSLgeneric | >=3.3.0 <3.3.2 || >=3.2.0 <3.2.3 || >=3.1.0 <3.1.7 || >=3.0.0 <3.0.15 | 3.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.1.7, 3.0.15 |
| Siemens/RUGGEDCOM RST2428Pgeneric | >=0 <V3.1 | V3.1 |
| Siemens/SCALANCE XCM-/XRM-/XCH-/XRH-300 familygeneric | >=0 <V3.1 | V3.1 |
| Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.5 <* | * |
| Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.5 <* | * |
| Siemens/SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.5 <* | * |
Published upstream
Sep 3, 2024
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Jul 14, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 6, 2026
Issue summary: Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address resulting in abnormal termination of the application process. Impact summary: Abnormal termination of an application can a cause a denial of service. Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address when comparing the expected name with an `otherName` subject alternative name of an X.509 certificate. This may result in an exception that terminates the application program. Note that basic certificate chain validation (signatures, dates, ...) is not affected, the denial of service can occur only when the application also specifies an expected DNS name, Email address or IP address. TLS servers rarely solicit client certificates, and even when they do, they generally don't perform a name check against a reference identifier (expected identity), but rather extract the presented identity after checking the certificate chain. So TLS servers are generally not affected and the severity of the issue is Moderate. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps openssl/openssl (generic), OpenSSL/OpenSSL (generic), Siemens/RUGGEDCOM RST2428P (generic), Siemens/SCALANCE XCM-/XRM-/XCH-/XRH-300 family (generic) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| openssl/opensslgeneric | >=3.3.0 <3.3.2 || >=3.2.0 <3.2.3 || >=3.1.0 <3.1.7 || >=3.0.0 <3.0.15 | 3.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.1.7, 3.0.15 |
| OpenSSL/OpenSSLgeneric | >=3.3.0 <3.3.2 || >=3.2.0 <3.2.3 || >=3.1.0 <3.1.7 || >=3.0.0 <3.0.15 | 3.3.2, 3.2.3, 3.1.7, 3.0.15 |
| Siemens/RUGGEDCOM RST2428Pgeneric | >=0 <V3.1 | V3.1 |
| Siemens/SCALANCE XCM-/XRM-/XCH-/XRH-300 familygeneric | >=0 <V3.1 | V3.1 |
| Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.5 <* | * |
| Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.5 <* | * |
| Siemens/SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.5 <* | * |
Published upstream
Sep 3, 2024
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Jul 14, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 6, 2026
Issue summary: Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address resulting in abnormal termination of the application process. Impact summary: Abnormal termination of an application can a cause a denial of service. Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address when comparing the expected name with an `otherName` subject alternative name of an X.509 certificate. This may result in an exception that terminates the application program. Note that basic certificate chain validation (signatures, dates, ...) is not affected, the denial of service can occur only when the application also specifies an expected DNS name, Email address or IP address. TLS servers rarely solicit client certificates, and even when they do, they generally don't perform a name check against a reference identifier (expected identity), but rather extract the presented identity after checking the certificate chain. So TLS servers are generally not affected and the severity of the issue is Moderate. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.