Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

Next.js image optimization has Denial of Service condition

Not in CISA KEVCVE-2024-47831CWE-674

Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it.

Edge rules
1/8
Our test
No exploit yet
CVSS
5.9
EPSS
0.7% Top 46%
Posts, 14d
02026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts
Published
2024-10-14
Next.js is a React Framework for the Web. Cersions on the 10.x, 11.x, 12.x, 13.x, and 14.x branches before version 14.2.7 contain a vulnerability in the image optimization feature which allows for a potential Denial of Service (DoS)… More

Next.js is a React Framework for the Web. Cersions on the 10.x, 11.x, 12.x, 13.x, and 14.x branches before version 14.2.7 contain a vulnerability in the image optimization feature which allows for a potential Denial of Service (DoS) condition which could lead to excessive CPU consumption. Neither the `next.config.js` file that is configured with `images.unoptimized` set to `true` or `images.loader` set to a non-default value nor the Next.js application that is hosted on Vercel are affected. This issue was fully patched in Next.js `14.2.7`. As a workaround, ensure that the `next.config.js` file has either `images.unoptimized`, `images.loader` or `images.loaderFile` assigned.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2024-47831: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Workers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.

Severity, decoded

CVSS 3.1
Medium · 5.9 / 10

Exploitable over the network under specific conditions, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of availability.

Over the internetNo login neededNo user actionHard to pull offSerious impact
How the score is built8 metrics
  • Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.
    Network
  • Attack complexityThe attack only works when conditions outside the attacker's control line up.
    High
  • Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.
    None
  • User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.
    None
  • ScopeThe damage stays within the vulnerable component.
    Unchanged
  • Confidentiality impactNo data is exposed.
    None
  • Integrity impactData cannot be changed by the attacker.
    None
  • Availability impactAn attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.
    High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CISA's assessmentSSVC, from the CVE record
ExploitationNone

CISA has seen no public exploit and no attacks.

AutomatableNo

At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.

Technical impactPartial

A successful attack gives limited control over the affected software or limited access to its data.

Public exploits

None found
0 Metasploit0 Exploit-DB0 Scanner template0 GitHub PoCs

No exploit in Exploit-DB or Metasploit, and no scanner template. That lowers, but doesn't remove, the chance of mass exploitation.

Timeline

  1. 2024-10-14
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2025-04-28
    F5 rule names it
    Earliest entry we can see is an update

Social

2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts

No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.

Vendor statements

Quoted
CloudflareWAF Managed RulesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

AWSAWS WAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.

Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.

Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.

FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patchesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)1 quoteRule published

Named by 2025-04-28; the first entry is an update, so the rule may be older.

2025-04-28Updated200012090Source
Updated: signature 200012090 "Next.js Image Optimizer Denial of Service" (Denial of Service, risk Medium), systems: JavaScript, ReactJS. References: CVE-2024-47831.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)No public source

This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.

OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.