Written by: Ferdi Gül

In today’s interconnected digital landscape, the rapid emergence of critical vulnerabilities demands an agile and informed approach to Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM). This week’s Focus Friday blog highlights high-profile incidents involving vulnerabilities in FortiGate firewalls, QNAP NAS systems, Mongoose, and the W3 Total Cache WordPress plugin. Each of these vulnerabilities poses unique challenges, from authentication bypasses enabling unauthorized access to database manipulation and SSRF attacks.

Leveraging Black Kite’s FocusTags™, we delve into the impact of these vulnerabilities from a TPRM perspective. This article offers detailed insights into the risks, remediation strategies, and questions TPRM professionals should be asking vendors to protect their ecosystems against potential breaches.

CVE-2022-40684: FortiGate Authentication Bypass Vulnerability

What is CVE-2022-40684?

CVE-2022-40684 is a critical authentication bypass vulnerability affecting Fortinet’s FortiOS, FortiProxy, and FortiSwitchManager products. This flaw allows unauthenticated attackers to perform administrative operations via specially crafted HTTP or HTTPS requests. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.8, indicating its critical severity, and an EPSS score of 97.26%, reflecting the significant likelihood of exploitation. First identified in October 2022, this vulnerability has been actively exploited in the wild, with reports of threat actors leveraging it to download device configurations and add unauthorized super_admin accounts. Notably, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) added CVE-2022-40684 to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on October 11, 2022. 

As part of Black Kite Research & Intelligence Team (BRITE), we have proactively addressed the exposure of configuration files, IP addresses, and VPN credentials belonging to over 15,000 FortiGate devices identified and analyzed on the dark web.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2022-40684?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be particularly vigilant regarding CVE-2022-40684 due to its potential impact on network security. The recent leak of configuration files and VPN credentials for over 15,000 FortiGate devices underscores the risk of unauthorized access to sensitive systems. If a vendor utilizes vulnerable FortiGate products, their compromised systems could serve as entry points for attackers, leading to data breaches and disruptions that may cascade to connected organizations. Given the critical role of firewalls in protecting network perimeters, any compromise can have far-reaching consequences.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2022-40684?

To assess and mitigate risks associated with this vulnerability, TPRM professionals should inquire:

1. Have you updated all instances of FortiOS, FortiProxy, and FortiSwitchManager products to the latest firmware versions where CVE-2022-40684 has been patched?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented IP restrictions, enhanced network activity monitoring, and deactivated the HTTP/HTTPS administrative interface as recommended in the advisory to mitigate the risk of CVE-2022-40684?
3. Have you reset all VPN and administrative credentials, especially those previously configured, and reviewed your firewall rules and configurations to ensure they align with current security best practices following the FortiGate firewall configuration leak?
4. Have you verified if your FortiGate devices are among the compromised by reviewing the leaked data and taken necessary actions to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive systems.

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

Vendors using affected Fortinet products should:

• Update Firmware: Upgrade to the latest firmware versions that address CVE-2022-40684.
• Change Credentials: Reset all VPN and administrative credentials, especially those previously configured.
• Review Configurations: Assess and modify firewall rules and configurations to align with current security best practices.
• Disable Administrative Interface: Deactivate the HTTP/HTTPS administrative interface to reduce the attack surface.
• Implement IP Restrictions: Limit access to the administrative interface by allowing only trusted IP addresses.
• Monitor Network Activity: Enhance monitoring to detect any unauthorized access or anomalies.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite has proactively addressed this issue by publishing the “FortiGate Leakage” FocusTag™ on January 17, 2025. This tag enables TPRM professionals to identify vendors potentially affected by the FortiGate data leak. By providing detailed asset information, including IP addresses and subdomains associated with the compromised devices, Black Kite empowers organizations to assess and mitigate risks efficiently. This actionable intelligence allows for targeted inquiries and remediation efforts, ensuring a robust third-party risk management strategy.

CVE-2024-53691 and CVE-2023-39298 in QNAP QTS and QuTS Hero

What are CVE-2024-53691 and CVE-2023-39298?

CVE-2024-53691 is a link following a vulnerability in QNAP’s QTS and QuTS hero operating systems. It allows remote attackers with user access to traverse the file system to unintended locations, potentially leading to unauthorized access to sensitive files and system compromise. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.7. 

CVE-2023-39298 is a missing authorization vulnerability affecting several QNAP operating system versions. It permits local authenticated users to access data or perform actions they should not be allowed to via unspecified vectors. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 7.8. As of January 23, 2025, neither vulnerability has been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About These Vulnerabilities?

QNAP NAS devices are widely used for storing and managing critical business data. Exploitation of these vulnerabilities could lead to unauthorized access, data breaches, and potential system compromises. For Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals, it’s crucial to assess whether vendors utilize vulnerable QNAP systems, as a compromise could indirectly affect your organization’s data integrity and security.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding These Vulnerabilities?

To evaluate the risk associated with these vulnerabilities, TPRM professionals should inquire:

1. Can you confirm if you have upgraded all instances of QNAP QTS and QuTS hero to versions QTS 5.2.0.2802 build 20240620 and QuTS hero h5.2.0.2802 build 20240620 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-53691 and CVE-2023-39298?
2. Have you implemented the recommended actions such as monitoring system logs, applying security patches promptly, implementing MFA, and restricting network access to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access due to the link following vulnerability in QNAP QTS and QuTS hero operating systems?
3. Can you confirm if you have taken measures to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive files and potential system compromise due to the link following vulnerability (CVE-2024-53691) in QNAP QTS and QuTS hero operating systems?
4.  Have you taken any additional steps to protect your QNAP devices from data theft, ransomware attacks, or malware deployment that could result from exploiting the vulnerabilities CVE-2024-53691 and CVE-2023-39298?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

Vendors utilizing affected QNAP systems should:

• Update Firmware: Upgrade to QTS 5.2.0.2802 build 20240620 or QuTS hero h5.2.0.2802 build 20240620 or later.
• Implement Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Enhance account security to prevent unauthorized access.
• Restrict Network Access: Configure firewalls and network settings to allow only trusted IP addresses access to NAS devices.
• Monitor System Logs: Regularly review logs for unusual activity indicating attempted exploitation.
• Apply Security Patches Promptly: Ensure all security patches are applied as soon as they become available.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for These Vulnerabilities?

Black Kite released the “QNAP QTS – Jan2025” FocusTag™ on January 23, 2025, to help organizations identify vendors potentially affected by these vulnerabilities. This tag provides detailed information, including the specific assets (IP addresses and subdomains) associated with vulnerable QNAP systems within a vendor’s infrastructure. By utilizing this intelligence, TPRM professionals can prioritize assessments and remediation efforts, ensuring that vendors have addressed these critical vulnerabilities.

CVE-2025-23061 in Mongoose

Mongoose is specifically an Object Data Modeling (ODM) library designed for Node.js, enabling easy interaction with MongoDB databases. It simplifies the management, validation, and modeling of data in MongoDB, providing developers with a more structured and secure working environment.

What is CVE-2025-23061?

CVE-2025-23061 is a critical code injection vulnerability affecting Mongoose, a MongoDB object modeling tool widely used for Node.js and Deno applications. It has a CVSS score of 9.0, emphasizing its severity, while the EPSS score is 0.05%, suggesting a lower probability of exploitation at present. This vulnerability arises from improper handling of nested $where filters used with the populate() function’s match option, enabling attackers to manipulate search queries and access sensitive data.

This flaw is linked to an incomplete fix for CVE-2024-53900, another critical issue involving the $where operator’s improper handling. The vulnerability impacts Mongoose versions prior to 8.9.5. Although PoC exploit code is unavailable and it has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, its potential impact is significant due to Mongoose’s wide adoption, with over 2.7 million weekly downloads.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2025-23061?

TPRM professionals should consider this vulnerability a high-priority concern due to Mongoose’s extensive use in applications that store sensitive data. If a vendor utilizes an unpatched version of Mongoose, their database integrity could be compromised, resulting in data manipulation, unauthorized access, or even larger breaches affecting downstream partners and customers. The prevalence of Mongoose as a dependency in critical systems underscores the potential ripple effect of an exploit.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2025-23061?

To evaluate vendor risk associated with this vulnerability, consider asking:

1. Have you upgraded Mongoose to version 8.9.5 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2025-23061 and the previously related CVE-2024-53900?
2. Can you confirm if you have reviewed your application’s use of the populate() function and $where filters to ensure no unintended exposure exists, as recommended in the advisory?
3. Have you implemented robust input validation and sanitization measures to prevent potential search injection attacks related to the Mongoose vulnerability?
4. Are you regularly auditing and updating all dependencies to incorporate the latest security patches, specifically those related to Mongoose and MongoDB object modeling tools?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

Vendors using Mongoose should:

1. Update Mongoose: Upgrade to version 8.9.5 or later to address the vulnerability.
2. Audit Codebase: Review the usage of $where filters and the populate() function to identify and mitigate potential exposure.
3. Implement Input Validation: Enforce robust validation and sanitization mechanisms for all database queries.
4. Monitor Dependencies: Regularly review and update dependencies to ensure all security patches are applied promptly.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite published the “Mongoose” FocusTag™ on January 22, 2025, to help organizations identify vendors potentially affected by this vulnerability. This tag provides high-confidence identification of systems using vulnerable Mongoose versions, offering actionable insights into affected assets, including IP addresses and subdomains. TPRM professionals can leverage this intelligence to prioritize their vendor risk assessments and ensure remediation efforts are effectively targeted.

CVE-2024-12365 in W3 Total Cache Plugin

W3 Total Cache (W3TC) is a well-known and powerful caching and performance optimization plugin designed for WordPress websites. This plugin enhances website speed, reduces loading times, and improves the overall user experience. It is particularly effective in delivering significant performance improvements for high-traffic websites.

What is CVE-2024-12365?

CVE-2024-12365 is a high-severity missing authorization vulnerability in the W3 Total Cache plugin for WordPress, affecting versions up to and including 2.8.1. With a CVSS score of 8.5 and an EPSS score of 0.09%, this vulnerability allows authenticated users with Subscriber-level access to exploit the is_w3tc_admin_page function to retrieve the plugin’s nonce value. Attackers can leverage this to perform unauthorized actions, potentially leading to information disclosure and server-side request forgery (SSRF).

Exploitation of this flaw could allow attackers to query internal services, including metadata on cloud-based applications, and consume service plan limits. While no PoC exploit code is currently available, more than a million WordPress sites using this plugin are at risk. As of January 22, 2025, this vulnerability has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2024-12365?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be highly attentive to this vulnerability due to its potential to expose sensitive internal data and compromise WordPress-based websites. Many businesses rely on WordPress as their primary web platform, and vulnerabilities in widely-used plugins like W3 Total Cache can create significant risks.

If a vendor’s website is compromised through this flaw, it may lead to:

• Data breaches involving sensitive business or customer information.
• Unintended exposure of internal application data through SSRF attacks.
• Loss of trust and credibility due to website exploitation.

Given the widespread use of WordPress and this specific plugin, the impact of unpatched systems can extend across interconnected organizations and their customers.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2024-12365?

To evaluate vendor risk, TPRM professionals can ask the following targeted questions:

1. Can you confirm if you have updated the W3 Total Cache plugin for WordPress to version 2.8.2 or later, which addresses the CVE-2024-12365 vulnerability?
2.  Have you implemented any additional security measures to monitor for unauthorized access or unusual behavior on your WordPress sites that could indicate exploitation attempts related to the CVE-2024-12365 vulnerability?
3. Have you conducted an audit of user roles and permissions to ensure that only necessary privileges are granted, minimizing potential exploitation by lower-level users as recommended in the advisory for the CVE-2024-12365 vulnerability?
4. Can you confirm if you have taken any steps to mitigate the risk of server-side request forgery, such as implementing security best practices or updating the W3 Total Cache plugin, in response to the CVE-2024-12365 vulnerability?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

Vendors using the W3 Total Cache plugin should take the following steps:

1. Update the Plugin: Upgrade to version 2.8.2 or newer, where the vulnerability has been fixed.
2. Audit User Permissions: Review and minimize privileges for users, ensuring Subscriber-level accounts have limited access.
3. Monitor Activity: Regularly review website activity logs for unusual or unauthorized behavior.
4. Enforce Security Best Practices: Maintain strong security protocols for WordPress installations, including strong passwords, regular plugin updates, and security plugins for intrusion detection.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite released the “W3 Total Cache” FocusTag™ on January 22, 2025, to help organizations identify vendors potentially impacted by this vulnerability. By providing very high-confidence information, such as asset-level details (e.g., IP addresses and subdomains), Black Kite enables TPRM professionals to quickly assess and mitigate risks. This FocusTag™ is instrumental in narrowing down affected vendors and ensuring targeted remediation efforts.

Enhancing TPRM Strategies with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are transformative tools designed to empower Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals with actionable insights in the face of an ever-evolving threat landscape. With this week’s vulnerabilities spanning multiple platforms and industries, the value of these FocusTags™ becomes especially apparent:

• Real-Time Threat Awareness: Instantly pinpoint vendors impacted by vulnerabilities like those in FortiGate firewalls, QNAP NAS systems, Mongoose, and the W3 Total Cache plugin, enabling rapid and targeted action.
• Prioritized Risk Management: Evaluate risks based on the criticality of the vulnerabilities and the vendor’s importance, allowing for efficient allocation of resources to mitigate threats.
• Tailored Vendor Engagement: Facilitate meaningful conversations with vendors, focusing on their exposure to vulnerabilities and the specific actions they’ve taken to address them.
• Enhanced Cybersecurity Posture: Gain a comprehensive view of the threat landscape, supporting the development of robust strategies to defend against future risks.

By translating complex cybersecurity data into practical intelligence, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ help TPRM professionals navigate the complexities of vendor risk management with precision and confidence. These tools are essential for maintaining resilience in today’s fast-paced digital environment, where proactive risk mitigation can mean the difference between security and compromise.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags^TM in the Last 30 Days:

• FortiGate Leakage: CVE-2022-40684, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability, Leaked Configurations and VPN Credentials for 15,000 FortiGate Devices.
• QNAP QTS – Jan2025: CVE-2024-53691, CVE-2023-39298, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Link Following Vulnerability, Missing Authorization Vulnerability in QNAP QTS.
• Mongoose: CVE-2025-23061, Search Injection Vulnerability in Mongoose.
• W3 Total Cache: CVE-2024-12365, Missing Authorization Vulnerability in WordPress’ W3 Total Cache Plugin.
• Juniper Junos: CVE-2025-21598, Out-of-bounds Read Vulnerability in Juniper’s Junos.
• Rsync: CVE-2024-12084, CVE-2024-12085, CVE-2024-12086, CVE-2024-12087, CVE-2024-12088, CVE-2024-12747, Heap-Buffer-Overflow Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Information Leak Vulnerability, File Leak Vulnerability, Path Traversal Vulnerability, Race Condition Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Rsync.
• SimpleHelp: CVE-2024-57727, CVE-2024-57728, CVE-2024-57726, Unauthenticated Path Traversal Vulnerability, Arbitrary File Upload Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in SimpleHelp.
• SonicWall SonicOS – Jan2025: CVE-2024-40762, CVE-2024-53704, CVE-2024-53706, CVE-2024-53705, Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG), Authentication Bypass Vulnerability, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability, and Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in SonicWall’ SonicOS SSLVPN, SSH Management, and Gen7 Cloud NSv SSH Config Function.
• Ivanti Connect Secure – Jan2025: CVE-2025-0282, CVE-2025-0283, Stack-Based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure, Policy Secure, and Ivanti Neurons for ZTA gateways.
• Progress WhatsUp Gold: CVE-2024-12108, CVE-2024-12106, CVE-2024-12105, Authentication Bypass by Spoofing Vulnerability, Missing Authentication for Critical Function, and  Path Traversal Vulnerability in Progress WhatsUp Gold.
• GoCD: CVE-2024-56320, Improper Authorization Vulnerability in GoCD.
• Apache Tomcat RCE: CVE-2024-56337, CVE-2024-50379, Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Apache Tomcat.
• CrushFTP: CVE-2024-53552, Account Takeover Vulnerability in CrushFTP.
• Gogs Server: CVE-2024-55947, CVE-2024-54148, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Gogs Server.
• BeyondTrust PRA RS: CVE-2024-12356, Command Injection Vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s  Privileged Remote Access (PRA), Remote Support (RS).
• Ivanti Cloud Services Application: CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, CVE-2024-11772, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Command Injection Vulnerability, and  RCE Vulnerability  SQLi Vulnerability in Ivanti Cloud Services Application.
• Cleo File Transfer: CVE-2024-50623, CVE-2024-55956, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Unrestricted File Upload and Download Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, LexiCom.

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-40684

https://breachforums.st/Thread-FortiGate-15K-Targets-Configs-VPN-Passwords

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/hackers-leak-configs-and-vpn-credentials-for-15-000-fortigate-devices

https://securityonline.info/15000-fortigate-firewalls-exposed-massive-leak-includes-vpn-credentials

https://www.fortinet.com/blog/psirt-blogs/update-regarding-cve-2022-40684

https://github.com/horizon3ai/CVE-2022-40684

https://www.qnap.com/en/security-advisory/qsa-24-28

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53691

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-39298

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-53691-poc-exploit-released-for-severe-qnap-rce-flaw

https://github.com/C411e/CVE-2024-53691

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-23061

https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-vg7j-7cwx-8wgw

https://github.com/Automattic/mongoose/releases/tag/8.9.5

CVE-2025-2306 (CVSS 9.0): Mongoose Flaw Leaves Millions of Downloads Exposed to Search Injection

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12365

https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/wordpress-plugins/w3-total-cache/w3-total-cache-281-authenticated-subscriber-missing-authorization-to-server-side-request-forgery

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-12365-popular-wordpress-caching-plugin-exposes-millions-of-sites-to-attack

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: TPRM Insights on FortiGate, QNAP, Mongoose, and W3 Total Cache Vulnerabilities with Black Kite’s FocusTags™ appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s Focus Friday, where we dive into key vulnerabilities impacting widely used technologies. This installment highlights three significant incidents that pose unique challenges to third-party risk management (TPRM) teams. From Juniper Junos OS to Rsync and SimpleHelp, we explore how these vulnerabilities affect the security posture of vendors and their downstream supply chains. By examining these issues, we aim to provide actionable insights and strategies to help organizations mitigate risks and maintain robust third-party relationships.

Juniper Junos CVE-2025-21598

What is the Juniper Junos BGP Vulnerability (CVE-2025-21598)?

CVE-2025-21598 is an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the routing protocol daemon (rpd) of Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved. When a device is configured with BGP packet receive trace options, an unauthenticated attacker can send malformed BGP packets that cause the rpd process to crash. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.2, making it a high-severity issue. It was first disclosed on January 14, 2025, and there are currently no reports of active exploitation. CISA’s KEV catalog does not yet list this vulnerability. Proof-of-concept (POC) is not available.

CVE-2025-21599 is a critical vulnerability affecting specific versions of Junos OS Evolved. It requires IPv6 to be enabled and involves attackers sending malformed IPv6 packets persistently to exhaust memory. Exploitation does not require authentication but needs network access to the device. The affected versions are:

• From 22.4-EVO: before 22.4R3-S5-EVO
• From 23.2-EVO: before 23.2R2-S2-EVO
• From 23.4-EVO: before 23.4R2-S2-EVO
• From 24.2-EVO: before 24.2R1-S2-EVO, and 24.2R2-EVO.

Versions prior to 22.4R1-EVO are unaffected. This vulnerability was excluded from the FocusTag™ scope due to its limitation to EVO versions and no detection by external clients specific to EVO.

Why should TPRM professionals care about CVE-2025-21598?

This vulnerability impacts network infrastructure devices, which are critical to business operations. If left unpatched, it could result in significant service interruptions, loss of connectivity, and reduced reliability of the affected network environment. Organizations that rely on these devices could face disruptions in their supply chain communications and business operations, making it essential for TPRM professionals to assess the risk and ensure proper mitigation measures are in place.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about CVE-2025-21598?

1. Have you updated all instances of Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved to the fixed versions mentioned in the advisory to mitigate the risk of CVE-2025-21598?
2. Can you confirm if you have disabled BGP packet receive trace options on your Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved devices to prevent potential exploitation of CVE-2025-21598?
3. Are you regularly inspecting your system logs for any indications of malformed BGP update messages, which may suggest attempted exploitation of CVE-2025-21598?
4. For Junos OS Evolved, have you ensured that all versions from 22.4-EVO before 22.4R3-S5-EVO, from 23.2-EVO before 23.2R2-S2-EVO, from 23.4-EVO before 23.4R2-S2-EVO, from 24.2-EVO before 24.2R1-S2-EVO, 24.2R2-EVO have been updated to mitigate the risk of CVE-2025-21599?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

• Upgrade all affected Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved devices to the patched versions.
• Disable BGP packets receive trace options if updating is not immediately possible.
• Implement continuous network monitoring to identify any indications of exploitation attempts.
• Maintain up-to-date logging configurations and review logs for signs of malformed BGP packets.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for CVE-2025-21598?

Black Kite published this FocusTag™ to help organizations pinpoint the vendors affected by CVE-2025-21598. By providing detailed asset information—including relevant subdomains and vulnerable IPs—Black Kite enables TPRM professionals to rapidly identify which vendors need immediate attention. This targeted approach reduces time spent on outreach and allows more efficient mitigation efforts.

Rsync Vulnerabilities (CVE-2024-12084, CVE-2024-12085, CVE-2024-12086, CVE-2024-12087, CVE-2024-12088, CVE-2024-12747)

What are the critical Rsync vulnerabilities?

Rsync, a widely-used file synchronization tool, has six significant vulnerabilities in versions 3.3.0 and earlier. These flaws pose risks such as arbitrary code execution, information leakage, and unauthorized system access, particularly for organizations relying on Rsync for backups.

Six vulnerabilities have been identified in Rsync, posing significant security risks. These include a heap-buffer overflow (CVE-2024-12084) in the Rsync daemon that allows attackers to execute code by controlling checksum lengths (s2length) and gaining server access. An information leak vulnerability (CVE-2024-12085) exposes uninitialized memory during file checksum comparisons. Additionally, malicious servers can exploit crafted checksums to extract arbitrary files from clients (CVE-2024-12086). Path traversal is possible due to improper symlink checks with the default –inc-recursive option (CVE-2024-12087), while a –safe-links bypass flaw (CVE-2024-12088) allows arbitrary file writes and further path traversal. Finally, a symbolic-link race condition (CVE-2024-12747) could lead to privilege escalation or data leakage by exploiting timing issues during file transfers. Exploitation of these vulnerabilities requires specific conditions, such as server access or manipulated configurations. 

Currently, no publicly available POC exists, and these vulnerabilities are not listed in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Affected versions include Rsync ≥3.2.7 and <3.4.0 for CVE-2024-12084, while other CVEs impact Rsync 3.3.0 and earlier. Organizations relying on Rsync for synchronization or backups should apply patches or mitigations promptly to mitigate risks of unauthorized access and data breaches.

Why should TPRM professionals care about Rsync vulnerabilities?

Many organizations rely on Rsync for critical backup operations. Unaddressed vulnerabilities could lead to severe disruptions, including unauthorized data exposure, system compromise, and operational downtime. These risks demand immediate attention from TPRM professionals to ensure that vendors and their supply chain partners have implemented the necessary remediations.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about the Rsync vulnerabilities?

1. Have you upgraded all instances of Rsync to version 3.4.0 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-12084, CVE-2024-12085, CVE-2024-12086, CVE-2024-12087, CVE-2024-12088, and CVE-2024-12747?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented the recommended mitigation measures such as restricting Rsync daemon access to trusted networks and authenticated users, and regularly reviewing and applying security best practices for system and network configurations?
3. Have you reviewed and updated any backup programs utilizing Rsync, such as Rclone, DeltaCopy, and ChronoSync, in response to these vulnerabilities?
4. Are you monitoring for any unusual activities that may indicate exploitation attempts related to these Rsync vulnerabilities, specifically those related to heap-buffer overflow, information leak, file leak, path traversal, safe-links bypass, and symbolic-link race condition?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

• Upgrade Rsync to version 3.4.0 or higher to eliminate known vulnerabilities.
• Disable unused options such as –inc-recursive and –safe-links to minimize exposure.
• Implement strict access controls, allowing only authenticated and trusted connections.
• Conduct regular security audits of your Rsync configuration and logs.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for these vulnerabilities?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for Rsync, published in January 2025, helps TPRM professionals identify vendors at risk from these vulnerabilities. By providing detailed information on affected versions, associated IPs, and potentially vulnerable assets, Black Kite enables organizations to narrow their outreach to only those vendors requiring immediate action. This targeted approach not only streamlines risk management processes but also helps protect sensitive data and critical systems from emerging threats.

SimpleHelp Vulnerabilities (CVE-2024-57727, CVE-2024-57728, CVE-2024-57726)

What are the critical SimpleHelp vulnerabilities?

Recent security assessments have uncovered critical vulnerabilities in SimpleHelp, a widely used remote support software.

CVE-2024-57726: A privilege escalation flaw that allows users with technician-level access to elevate their privileges to administrator due to missing backend authorization checks.  This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.2, making it a high-severity issue. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.8, making it a high-severity issue.

CVE-2024-57727: A path traversal vulnerability allowing unauthenticated attackers to download arbitrary files, including sensitive configuration files. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 7.5, making it a high-severity issue.

CVE-2024-57728: An arbitrary file upload vulnerability enabling attackers with administrative privileges to upload malicious files anywhere on the server, potentially leading to remote code execution. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.8, making it a high-severity issue.

These vulnerabilities can be chained to compromise the entire server, leading to sensitive information disclosure and potential remote code execution. They affect SimpleHelp versions 5.5.7 and earlier. Currently, there are no reports of these vulnerabilities being exploited in the wild, no available PoC, and no listing in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

Why should TPRM professionals care about SimpleHelp vulnerabilities?

SimpleHelp is widely used for remote support, making these vulnerabilities particularly concerning. A compromised SimpleHelp server could expose sensitive client information, provide attackers with persistent remote access, and lead to unauthorized actions such as executing malicious scripts. TPRM professionals must ensure that vendors relying on SimpleHelp have patched their systems and implemented necessary security controls to avoid supply chain disruptions and data breaches.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about SimpleHelp vulnerabilities?

1. Have you updated all instances of SimpleHelp to versions 5.5.8, 5.4.10, or 5.3.9 to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-57727, CVE-2024-57728, and CVE-2024-57726?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented IP access restrictions on your SimpleHelp server to accept technician and administrator logins only from trusted IP addresses, as recommended in the advisory?
3. Have you changed the administrator and technician account passwords after updating SimpleHelp to ensure any previously compromised credentials are invalidated?
4. Are you regularly reviewing your server logs for any unusual or unauthorized activities that may indicate attempted exploitation of these vulnerabilities in SimpleHelp?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

• Update SimpleHelp to the latest secure versions (5.5.8, 5.4.10, or 5.3.9) to address these vulnerabilities.
• Change Administrator Passwords. After updating, change the administrator password of the SimpleHelp server to ensure any previously compromised credentials are invalidated.
• Update Technician Account Passwords. Reset passwords for all technician accounts, especially those not utilizing third-party authentication services.
• Restrict IP Access. Configure the SimpleHelp server to accept technician and administrator logins only from trusted IP addresses to reduce unauthorized access risks.
• Monitor System Logs. Regularly review server logs for any unusual or unauthorized activities that may indicate attempted exploitation.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for these vulnerabilities?

Black Kite provides a detailed FocusTag™ highlighting these vulnerabilities, including a list of affected versions and mitigation steps. By using Black Kite’s asset information—such as associated IP addresses and potentially vulnerable subdomains—TPRM professionals can quickly identify which vendors require immediate attention, streamlining the risk mitigation process.

Enhancing TPRM Strategies with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

As the cyber threat landscape continues to evolve, maintaining a resilient Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) framework is more crucial than ever. Black Kite’s FocusTags™ provide a unique advantage, allowing organizations to identify and respond to high-profile vulnerabilities quickly and effectively. By incorporating FocusTags into their TPRM processes, organizations gain:

Timely Vendor Risk Identification: Quickly determine which vendors are impacted by emerging threats, enabling prompt and strategic action.
Prioritized Risk Management: Focus on the most critical vulnerabilities and vendors, ensuring that resources are allocated where they’re needed most.
Enhanced Vendor Collaboration: Conduct more informed and productive discussions with vendors, addressing their specific exposure and improving overall security measures.
Broader Security Insight: Gain a comprehensive view of the current threat landscape, helping TPRM teams anticipate future risks and strengthen their cybersecurity defenses.

With Black Kite’s FocusTags™, TPRM professionals have the tools they need to transform complex threat data into actionable intelligence. This capability not only improves risk management efficiency but also helps ensure that organizations can confidently manage their third-party ecosystem in an increasingly unpredictable digital environment.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags^TM in the Last 30 Days:

• Juniper Junos: CVE-2025-21598, Out-of-bounds Read vulnerability in Juniper’s Junos.
• Rsync: CVE-2024-12084, CVE-2024-12085, CVE-2024-12086, CVE-2024-12087, CVE-2024-12088, CVE-2024-12747, Heap-Buffer-Overflow Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Information Leak Vulnerability, File Leak Vulnerability, Path Traversal Vulnerability, Race Condition Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Rsync.
• SimpleHelp: CVE-2024-57727, CVE-2024-57728, CVE-2024-57726, Unauthenticated Path Traversal Vulnerability, Arbitrary File Upload Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in SimpleHelp.
• SonicWall SonicOS – Jan2025: CVE-2024-40762, CVE-2024-53704, CVE-2024-53706, CVE-2024-53705, Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG), Authentication Bypass Vulnerability, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability, and Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in SonicWall’ SonicOS SSLVPN, SSH Management, and Gen7 Cloud NSv SSH Config Function.
• Ivanti Connect Secure – Jan2025: CVE-2025-0282, CVE-2025-0283, Stack-Based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure, Policy Secure, and Ivanti Neurons for ZTA gateways.
• Progress WhatsUp Gold: CVE-2024-12108, CVE-2024-12106, CVE-2024-12105, Authentication Bypass by Spoofing Vulnerability, Missing Authentication for Critical Function, and  Path Traversal Vulnerability in Progress WhatsUp Gold.
• GoCD: CVE-2024-56320, Improper Authorization Vulnerability in GoCD.
• Apache Tomcat RCE: CVE-2024-56337, CVE-2024-50379, Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Apache Tomcat.
• CrushFTP: CVE-2024-53552, Account Takeover Vulnerability in CrushFTP.
• Gogs Server: CVE-2024-55947, CVE-2024-54148, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Gogs Server.
• BeyondTrust PRA RS: CVE-2024-12356, Command Injection Vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s  Privileged Remote Access (PRA), Remote Support (RS).
• Ivanti Cloud Services Application: CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, CVE-2024-11772, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Command Injection Vulnerability, and  RCE Vulnerability  SQLi Vulnerability in Ivanti Cloud Services Application.
• Cleo File Transfer: CVE-2024-50623, CVE-2024-55956, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Unrestricted File Upload and Download Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, LexiCom.
• Qlik Sense Enterprise: CVE-2024-55579, CVE-2024-55580, Arbitrary EXE Execution Vulnerability Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Qlik Sense Enterprise.

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-21598

https://supportportal.juniper.net/s/article/2025-01-Security-Bulletin-Junos-OS-and-Junos-OS-Evolved-When-BGP-traceoptions-are-configured-receipt-of-malformed-BGP-packets-causes-RPD-to-crash-CVE-2025-21598?language=en_US

https://supportportal.juniper.net/s/article/2025-01-Security-Bulletin-Junos-OS-Evolved-Receipt-of-specifically-malformed-IPv6-packets-causes-kernel-memory-exhaustion-leading-to-Denial-of-Service-CVE-2025-21599?language=en_US

https://securityonline.info/unauthenticated-attackers-can-exploit-junos-vulnerabilities-cve-2025-21598-cve-2025-21599

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12086

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12087

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12747

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12084

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12088

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12085

https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2025/01/14/3

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-12084-cvss-9-8-code-execution-risk-rsync-vulnerability-demands-immediate-patching

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57726

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57727

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57728

https://simple-help.com/kb—security-vulnerabilities-01-2025#upgrading-to-v5-5-8

https://thehackernews.com/2025/01/critical-simplehelp-flaws-allow-file.html

https://securityonline.info/simplehelp-urgents-to-patch-critical-security-vulnerabilities

https://thehackernews.com/2023/04/iranian-hackers-using-simplehelp-remote.html

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: Third-Party Risks From Critical Juniper Junos, Rsync, and SimpleHelp Vulnerabilities appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s Focus Friday blog, where we analyze high-profile vulnerabilities and incidents from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. As organizations grapple with the growing complexities of cybersecurity threats, identifying and addressing vendor-related risks becomes paramount. This week, we had a busy week focusing on vulnerabilities. In this week’s article, we examined critical vulnerabilities in widely used products, including SonicWall SonicOS, Ivanti Connect Secure, Progress WhatsUp Gold, and GoCD. These vulnerabilities underscore the importance of swift action and strategic prioritization in TPRM processes. Read on to explore actionable insights and strategies to mitigate these risks.

Critical Vulnerabilities in SonicWall SonicOS

What are the vulnerabilities affecting SonicWall SonicOS?

The SonicWall SonicOS platform has been found vulnerable to multiple issues that could severely impact network security. Below are the key vulnerabilities:

CVE-2024-40762: Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) vulnerability in the SSLVPN authentication token generator. This flaw allows attackers to predict authentication tokens, potentially leading to authentication bypass. (CVSS Score: 7.1)

CVE-2024-53704: Authentication Bypass vulnerability in the SSLVPN mechanism that could enable remote attackers to gain unauthorized system access. (CVSS Score: 8.2)

CVE-2024-53706: Local Privilege Escalation vulnerability in the Gen7 SonicOS Cloud platform NSv (AWS and Azure editions). This allows attackers to escalate privileges to root, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution. (CVSS Score: 7.8)

CVE-2024-53705: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the SSH management interface. Attackers could establish TCP connections to arbitrary IP addresses and ports, enabling further attacks. (CVSS Score: 6.5, EPSS Score: 0.04%)

These vulnerabilities were disclosed in SonicWall’s security advisory on January 7, 2025. While no active exploitation has been reported yet, similar vulnerabilities have been targeted by Chinese threat actors in the past, raising the likelihood of exploitation in future attack campaigns. As of now, these vulnerabilities are not listed in CISA’s KEV catalog.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

The vulnerabilities in SonicWall SonicOS present significant risks for organizations that rely on these devices for network security:

• Authentication Bypass (CVE-2024-53704): Attackers gaining unauthorized access could compromise sensitive data, introduce malware, or disrupt critical services.
• Local Privilege Escalation (CVE-2024-53706): A successful attack could allow threat actors to execute arbitrary code, potentially leading to full control of the affected systems.
• SSRF (CVE-2024-53705): This could facilitate lateral movement or act as a pivot point for launching further attacks.
• PRNG Vulnerability (CVE-2024-40762): Weak token generation undermines the reliability of authentication mechanisms, posing a significant threat to systems reliant on SSLVPN.

These vulnerabilities directly affect SonicWall Gen6/6.5, Gen7, and TZ80 devices, often used by organizations as a critical part of their perimeter defense. Exploitation could result in compromised networks, data breaches, or service interruptions, which would affect operational and business continuity.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

1. Have you updated all affected Gen6/6.5, Gen7, and TZ80 series devices to the recommended SonicOS versions (6.5.5.1-6n, 7.1.3-7015, 7.0.1-5165, and 8.0.0-8037 respectively) to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-40762, CVE-2024-53704, CVE-2024-53705, and CVE-2024-53706?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented measures to limit SSLVPN and SSH management access to trusted sources or disabled access from the internet entirely to reduce exposure to the vulnerabilities CVE-2024-40762 and CVE-2024-53704?
3. Have you enabled Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) for all remote access to enhance security against the improper authentication issue in the SSLVPN mechanism (CVE-2024-53704)?
4. How are you monitoring your system logs and network traffic to detect any unusual activity that may indicate attempted exploitation of the server-side request forgery (SSRF) flaw in the SSH management interface (CVE-2024-53705) and the privilege escalation issue in the Gen7 SonicOS Cloud platform NSv (CVE-2024-53706)?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

To mitigate the risks associated with these vulnerabilities, vendors should:

1. Update Firmware: Ensure all impacted devices are updated to the fixed versions:
   • Gen6 Firewalls: SonicOS 6.5.5.1-6n or higher
   • Gen7 Firewalls: SonicOS 7.1.3-7015 or higher
   • Gen7 NSv: SonicOS 7.0.1-5165 or higher
   • TZ80 Series: SonicOS 8.0.0-8037 or higher
2. Restrict Access: Limit SSLVPN and SSH management access to trusted sources or disable access from the internet entirely.
3. Enable Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Strengthen authentication for all remote access to reduce attack surface.
4. Monitor and Log: Continuously review system logs and monitor network traffic for anomalies that may indicate exploitation attempts.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for these vulnerabilities?

Black Kite published the FocusTag™ SonicWall SonicOS – Jan2025 on January 8, 2025 to help TPRM professionals quickly identify vendors at risk. The tag provides:

• A list of vendors using affected SonicWall devices and their associated assets, such as IP addresses or subdomains.
• Insight into which vulnerabilities may impact vendors’ systems.
• An updated status on exploitation activity or new advisories.

Using this tag, professionals can narrow the scope of their risk assessments, focus efforts on high-priority vendors, and expedite their response to these vulnerabilities.

CVE-2025-0282 and CVE-2025-0283 in Ivanti Connect Secure

What are the vulnerabilities affecting Ivanti Connect Secure?

Ivanti Connect Secure, Policy Secure, and Neurons for ZTA Gateway products are affected by two critical vulnerabilities:

CVE-2025-0282: A Critical Stack-Based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability that permits unauthenticated remote code execution. This vulnerability affects Ivanti Connect Secure versions 22.7R2 through 22.7R2.4, Policy Secure versions 22.7R1 through 22.7R1.2, and Neurons for ZTA Gateways versions 22.7R2 through 22.7R2.3. It has a CVSS score of 9.0, reflecting its high severity, and an EPSS score of 0.83%, indicating a notable likelihood of exploitation.

CVE-2025-0283: A High-Severity Stack-Based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability that enables local authenticated attackers to escalate their privileges. This issue impacts the same product versions as CVE-2025-0282. It has a CVSS score of 7.0 and an EPSS score of 0.04%, suggesting a moderate risk of exploitation.

Both vulnerabilities were disclosed on January 8, 2025. CVE-2025-0282 has been listed in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on January 8, 2025, and is being exploited in limited incidents, particularly targeting Connect Secure appliances. Mandiant has attributed these exploitations to UNC5337, a suspected subgroup of the China-based espionage group UNC5221. No exploitation of CVE-2025-0283 has been reported.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

These vulnerabilities present significant risks to organizations using Ivanti products:

• CVE-2025-0282: The ability to achieve unauthenticated remote code execution could enable attackers to gain full control of affected systems, compromising network integrity and exposing sensitive data.
• CVE-2025-0283: Privilege escalation could allow an attacker with local access to execute actions reserved for administrators, further increasing the risk of insider threats or unauthorized system changes.

The active exploitation of CVE-2025-0282 highlights the urgency of addressing these vulnerabilities, particularly for organizations relying on these products for secure remote access and network security.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

1. Have you identified any systems within your organization running vulnerable versions of Ivanti Connect Secure, Policy Secure, or Neurons for ZTA Gateways?
2. Have you applied the necessary patches for these vulnerabilities, and if so, when was the patching completed?
3. Are you actively monitoring systems for signs of exploitation, particularly regarding CVE-2025-0282?
4. Have you implemented Ivanti’s Integrity Checker Tool (ICT) to detect compromises, and what were the results?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

To mitigate the risks associated with these vulnerabilities, vendors should:

1. Apply Patches Immediately: Upgrade to the latest patched versions:
   • Ivanti Connect Secure: Version 22.7R2.5 or higher.
   • Policy Secure: Patched versions available by January 21, 2025.
   • Neurons for ZTA Gateways: Patched versions available by January 21, 2025.
2. Perform Integrity Checks: Use Ivanti’s Integrity Checker Tool (ICT) to detect any signs of compromise in both internal and external systems.
3. Restrict Internet Exposure: Ensure that Policy Secure appliances are not exposed to the internet, reducing the likelihood of exploitation.
4. Factory Reset Compromised Systems: If signs of compromise are detected, perform a factory reset before redeployment.
5. Monitor Activity: Continuously review system logs and network traffic for anomalies that may indicate exploitation attempts.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for these vulnerabilities?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ Ivanti Connect Secure – Jan2025 enables TPRM professionals to identify vendors at risk of exposure to these vulnerabilities. This tag provides:

• Insight into which vendors utilize affected Ivanti products and their associated assets, such as IP addresses and subdomains.
• Actionable intelligence to prioritize assessments and remediation efforts.
• Updates on exploitation activity and vendor patching status to guide decision-making.

The tag was published on January 9, 2025. Leveraging this tag can streamline risk management efforts and enhance the security posture of third-party ecosystems.

CVE-2024-12108, CVE-2024-12105, and CVE-2024-12106 Vulnerabilities in Progress WhatsUp Gold

What are the vulnerabilities affecting Progress WhatsUp Gold?

The Progress WhatsUp Gold network monitoring software has been identified as vulnerable to the following critical and medium-severity security issues:

The vulnerabilities affecting Progress WhatsUp Gold include the following:

CVE-2024-12108: An Authentication Bypass by Spoofing Vulnerability that allows attackers to gain complete control of the WhatsUp Gold server via the public API. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.6 and an EPSS score of 0.07%, making it critical in severity.

CVE-2024-12106: A Missing Authentication for Critical Function Vulnerability that enables unauthenticated attackers to configure LDAP settings, potentially leading to unauthorized access and data breaches. While this vulnerability is rated Critical with a CVSS score of 9.4 by the CNA, the NIST CVSS score is 7.5. Its EPSS score is 0.05%.

CVE-2024-12105: A Path Traversal Vulnerability that allows authenticated users to extract sensitive information through specially crafted HTTP requests. This vulnerability is rated Medium with a CVSS score of 6.5 and an EPSS score of 0.05%.

These vulnerabilities affect WhatsUp Gold versions prior to 24.0.2. Progress issued a security bulletin on December 12, 2024, urging users to upgrade. While no evidence of active exploitation exists, similar vulnerabilities have historically attracted threat actors targeting network monitoring systems.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

The WhatsUp Gold vulnerabilities present critical risks to network security due to the product’s integral role in monitoring and managing network devices. Exploitation of these vulnerabilities could result in:

• Full System Compromise: CVE-2024-12108 could allow attackers to control the WhatsUp Gold server, compromising all monitored devices and exposing sensitive configurations.
• Data Breaches: CVE-2024-12106 could enable attackers to tamper with LDAP settings, leading to unauthorized access to sensitive data or services.
• Sensitive Information Exposure: CVE-2024-12105 could facilitate information disclosure, which could be leveraged for subsequent attacks.

These risks make these vulnerabilities particularly concerning for third-party risk management (TPRM) professionals monitoring vendor ecosystems. The critical CVSS scores of CVE-2024-12108 and CVE-2024-12106 highlight the need for immediate action.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

1. Have you identified any systems within your organization running vulnerable versions of WhatsUp Gold prior to 24.0.2?
2. Has your organization implemented the recommended update to version 24.0.2, and when was it completed?
3. Are access controls in place to restrict unauthorized changes to LDAP configurations and prevent exploitation?
4. How do you monitor and address unusual activity that could indicate exploitation attempts related to these vulnerabilities?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

To address these vulnerabilities, vendors should:

1. Upgrade Software: Immediately update to WhatsUp Gold version 24.0.2 to patch all identified vulnerabilities.
2. Restrict Access: Limit server access to authorized personnel only and ensure secure configuration of LDAP settings.
3. Monitor Logs: Regularly review server and network logs for anomalies indicative of exploitation attempts.
4. Enhance Security Measures: Implement firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and strong authentication mechanisms to mitigate potential risks.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for these vulnerabilities?

Black Kite provides the FocusTag™ Progress WhatsUp Gold, published on January 2, 2025, to help TPRM professionals identify and address potential risks in their vendor ecosystems. This tag allows users to:

1. Determine which vendors utilize affected versions of WhatsUp Gold and the associated assets.
2. Access details on vulnerable IP addresses and subdomains to prioritize risk assessments.
3. Leverage actionable insights to communicate effectively with vendors and ensure timely remediation.

CVE-2024-56320 in GoCD

What is the GoCD Admin Privilege Escalation Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-56320 is a Critical Improper Authorization Vulnerability affecting GoCD versions prior to 24.5.0. This flaw enables authenticated users to persistently escalate their privileges to admin level, compromising the system’s integrity and security. The vulnerability arises from insufficient access controls in the admin “Configuration XML” UI feature and its associated API. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.4 and an EPSS score of 0.05%, and it was published in January 2025.

This vulnerability cannot be exploited without prior authentication, requiring an attacker to have a valid GoCD user account. It poses a significant insider threat but does not currently have publicly available exploit code. As of now, it is not listed in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

Why should TPRM professionals care about this vulnerability?

The critical nature of CVE-2024-56320 makes it a significant concern for TPRM professionals. As GoCD is a continuous delivery server, its exploitation could:

• Compromise CI/CD Pipelines: Escalated admin privileges could allow attackers to alter build configurations, inject malicious code, or disrupt deployments.
• Sensitive Information Disclosure: Unauthorized access to admin-only data could expose credentials, API keys, and system configurations.
• Operational Risks: Persistent admin-level access increases the risk of prolonged exploitation and unauthorized system changes.

This vulnerability highlights the importance of securing insider accounts and CI/CD environments, both critical for maintaining operational and data security.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about this vulnerability?

1. Have you upgraded all instances of GoCD to version 24.5.0 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-56320?
2. Have you implemented the recommended workarounds such as using a reverse proxy or web application firewall (WAF) to block external access to paths with the /go/rails/ prefix, and limiting GoCD user base to trusted individuals?
3. Can you confirm if you have taken steps to review network logs regularly for any unusual or unauthorized activities that could indicate exploitation attempts related to CVE-2024-56320?
4. Have you considered temporarily disabling plugins like the guest-login-plugin that allow limited anonymous access to further secure your GoCD instances from potential exploitation of CVE-2024-56320?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

To mitigate the risks of CVE-2024-56320, vendors should:

1. Upgrade to GoCD Version 24.5.0: This version addresses the improper authorization flaw and prevents privilege escalation.
2. Restrict Access: Implement a reverse proxy or web application firewall (WAF) to block access to vulnerable paths with the /go/rails/ prefix. This can mitigate the risk without affecting functionality.
3. Limit User Base: Reduce GoCD access to a smaller group of trusted users. Temporarily disable plugins like the “guest-login-plugin” to prevent anonymous or unauthorized access.
4. Monitor Logs: Regularly review system and application logs for signs of privilege escalation or unauthorized access.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ GoCD provides actionable intelligence to help TPRM professionals identify vendors potentially impacted by CVE-2024-56320. The tag enables users to:

• Pinpoint vendors utilize vulnerable GoCD versions and associated assets such as IP addresses or subdomains.
• Access insights into vendors’ patch management and security practices related to CI/CD environments.
• Expedite risk assessments by narrowing the scope to the most at-risk vendors.

This FocusTag™ was published on January 8, 2025. Black Kite users can operationalize this tag to prioritize remediation efforts and minimize exposure to insider threats.

Maximizing TPRM Effectiveness with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are indispensable tools for refining TPRM strategies in today’s dynamic cybersecurity landscape. This week’s vulnerabilities in SonicWall SonicOS, Ivanti Connect Secure, Progress WhatsUp Gold, and GoCD highlight the critical role of FocusTags™ in proactive risk management. Here’s how these tags empower TPRM professionals:

1. Real-Time Risk Identification: FocusTags™ enable immediate identification of vendors exposed to critical vulnerabilities, such as the authentication bypass issues in SonicWall or the privilege escalation risks in GoCD. This rapid insight ensures a timely response to emerging threats.
2. Strategic Risk Prioritization: By assessing both the severity of vulnerabilities and the importance of affected vendors, FocusTags™ helps allocate resources efficiently, addressing the most pressing risks first.
3. Enhanced Vendor Engagement: Armed with precise information, TPRM teams can initiate targeted discussions with vendors, emphasizing their exposure to vulnerabilities like the stack-based buffer overflow in Ivanti products or the API flaws in WhatsUp Gold.
4. Strengthened Cybersecurity Posture: With a comprehensive overview of the evolving threat landscape, FocusTags™ aid in fortifying an organization’s overall security defenses against vulnerabilities impacting critical vendor systems.

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ simplify the complexity of cybersecurity threats by translating intricate technical data into actionable intelligence. This capability is critical for managing third-party risks effectively and proactively, ensuring that organizations remain one step ahead in mitigating potential threats.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags^TM in the Last 30 Days:

• SonicWall SonicOS – Jan2025: CVE-2024-40762, CVE-2024-53704, CVE-2024-53706, CVE-2024-53705, Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG), Authentication Bypass Vulnerability, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability, and Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in SonicWall’ SonicOS SSLVPN, SSH Management, and Gen7 Cloud NSv SSH Config Function.
• Ivanti Connect Secure – Jan2025: CVE-2025-0282, CVE-2025-0283, Stack-Based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure, Policy Secure, and Ivanti Neurons for ZTA gateways.
• Progress WhatsUp Gold: CVE-2024-12108, CVE-2024-12106, CVE-2024-12105, Authentication Bypass by Spoofing Vulnerability, Missing Authentication for Critical Function, and  Path Traversal Vulnerability in Progress WhatsUp Gold.
• GoCD: CVE-2024-56320, Improper Authorization Vulnerability in GoCD.
• Apache Tomcat RCE: CVE-2024-56337, CVE-2024-50379, Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Apache Tomcat.
• CrushFTP: CVE-2024-53552, Account Takeover Vulnerability in CrushFTP.
• Gogs Server: CVE-2024-55947, CVE-2024-54148, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Gogs Server.
• BeyondTrust PRA RS: CVE-2024-12356, Command Injection Vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s  Privileged Remote Access (PRA), Remote Support (RS).
• Ivanti Cloud Services Application: CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, CVE-2024-11772, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Command Injection Vulnerability, and  RCE Vulnerability  SQLi Vulnerability in Ivanti Cloud Services Application.
• Cleo File Transfer: CVE-2024-50623, CVE-2024-55956, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Unrestricted File Upload and Download Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, LexiCom.
• Qlik Sense Enterprise: CVE-2024-55579, CVE-2024-55580, Arbitrary EXE Execution Vulnerability Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Qlik Sense Enterprise.
• SAP NetWeaver JAVA: CVE-2024-47578, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA (Adobe Document Services).
• PAN-OS: CVE-2024-0012, CVE-2024-9474, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability and Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Palo Alto’s PAN-OS.

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-40762

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53704

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53706

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53705

https://www.sonicwall.com/support/notices/product-notice-sslvpn-and-ssh-vulnerability-in-sonicos/250107100311877

https://securityonline.info/sonicwall-issues-important-security-advisory-for-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-sonicos

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0282

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0283

https://forums.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-Ivanti-Connect-Secure-Policy-Secure-ZTA-Gateways-CVE-2025-0282-CVE-2025-0283?language=en_US

https://thehackernews.com/2025/01/ivanti-flaw-cve-2025-0282-actively.html

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12108

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12106

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12105

https://community.progress.com/s/article/WhatsUp-Gold-Security-Bulletin-December-2024

CVE-2024-12108 (CVSS 9.6) and Beyond: Progress Issues Critical Patch for WhatsUp GoldNetwork Monitoring Software

https://research.checkpoint.com/2025/6th-january-threat-intelligence-report

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-56320

https://github.com/gocd/gocd/security/advisories/GHSA-346h-q594-rj8j

https://securityonline.info/gocd-patches-critical-vulnerability-allowing-user-privilege-escalation

The post Focus Friday: Addressing Critical Vulnerabilities in SonicWall, Ivanti, Progress, and GoCD appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome! We’ve come together for the last Focus Friday blog post of 2024. As we close out 2024, I wish everyone a safe, happy, and healthy new year. At the same time, we’ve completed another significant year in cybersecurity. This year, we witnessed important developments in the cybersecurity world and encountered many critical vulnerabilities. Throughout the year, we have explored numerous high-profile vulnerabilities to help organizations manage third-party risks. Today, in this final post of 2024, we will focus on critical security flaws in widely used services like Gogs Server, CrushFTP, and Apache Tomcat. In this post, we will explore what these vulnerabilities mean for Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals and how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ can provide a more effective approach to managing these risks.

Apache Tomcat Remote Code Execution Vulnerabilities (CVE-2024-50379, CVE-2024-56337)

What are the Apache Tomcat Remote Code Execution (RCE) Vulnerabilities?

Apache Tomcat has been identified with two critical RCE vulnerabilities: CVE-2024-50379 and CVE-2024-56337. These vulnerabilities arise from Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) race conditions, allowing attackers to execute unauthorized code on affected systems.

CVE-2024-50379 occurs during JavaServer Pages (JSP) compilation in Apache Tomcat, enabling RCE on case-insensitive file systems when the default servlet is configured with write functionality (non-default configuration). Similarly, CVE-2024-56337 results from the incomplete mitigation of CVE-2024-50379, affecting systems under the same configuration but requiring additional configuration depending on the Java version. Both vulnerabilities have a CVSS score of 9.8, indicating critical severity.

These vulnerabilities were first reported on December 17, 2024. While proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit code is available, no evidence of active exploitation has been reported. They have not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, and no advisory has been published by CISA.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

Apache Tomcat is widely used to deploy Java-based web applications, making these vulnerabilities highly impactful. The risks associated with these vulnerabilities include:

• Unauthorized Access: Attackers exploiting these vulnerabilities could gain unauthorized access to systems and sensitive data.
• Service Disruption: Successful exploitation could lead to service disruption and potential data loss.
• Reputation Damage: Compromises may damage an organization’s reputation and erode customer trust.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

To assess the risk posed by these vulnerabilities, TPRM professionals can ask the following questions:

1. Have you updated all instances of Apache Tomcat to versions 11.0.2, 10.1.34, or 9.0.98 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-50379 and CVE-2024-56337?
2. Can you confirm that the default servlet’s write functionality has been disabled on your Apache Tomcat servers to prevent the occurrence of the TOCTOU race condition associated with CVE-2024-50379 and CVE-2024-56337?
3. Depending on your Java version, have you adjusted the sun.io.useCanonCaches system property as recommended to fully mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-50379 and CVE-2024-56337?
4. Are you regularly reviewing your system logs and network activity to detect any signs of exploitation attempts related to these Apache Tomcat vulnerabilities?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

Vendors should take the following actions to mitigate these vulnerabilities:

• Upgrade Apache Tomcat: Update to the latest secure versions:
  • Apache Tomcat 11.0.2 or later
  • Apache Tomcat 10.1.34 or later
  • Apache Tomcat 9.0.98 or later
• Configure Java System Properties: Depending on the Java version in use:
  • For Java 8 or Java 11: Explicitly set the sun.io.useCanonCaches system property to false.
  • For Java 17: Ensure sun.io.useCanonCaches is set to false.
  • For Java 21 and later: No additional configuration is required as the property and related cache have been removed.
• Restrict Write Access: Ensure that the default servlet’s write functionality is disabled unless absolutely necessary.
• Regular Monitoring: Continuously review system logs and network activity for signs of exploitation attempts.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite offers a FocusTag titled “Apache Tomcat RCE” which provides the following benefits:

• Vendor Exposure Assessment: Identifies vendors potentially impacted by these vulnerabilities.
• Asset Information: Supplies details on assets (IP addresses and subdomains) that may be at risk, enabling targeted remediation efforts.
• Timely Updates: Ensures that TPRM professionals are informed about the latest developments and mitigations related to these vulnerabilities.

This FocusTag™ ensures efficient vendor management and proactive risk mitigation, empowering TPRM professionals to address critical vulnerabilities effectively.

CrushFTP Account Takeover Vulnerability (CVE-2024-53552)

What is the CrushFTP Account Takeover Vulnerability?

CrushFTP, a widely used file transfer server, has disclosed a critical vulnerability identified as CVE-2024-53552. This flaw affects versions prior to 10.8.3 in the 10.x series and prior to 11.2.3 in the 11.x series. The vulnerability arises from improper handling of password reset functionalities, enabling attackers to craft malicious password reset links. If a user clicks on such a link, their account can be compromised, granting unauthorized access to sensitive data and system controls. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.8, indicating a critical severity level. This issue was first reported on November 11, 2024. While PoC exploit code is not available, there is no evidence of active exploitation in the wild. The vulnerability has not been added to the CISA’s KEV catalog, and no advisory has been published by CISA. 

Why should TPRM professionals care about this vulnerability?

CrushFTP is widely used for secure file transfers in enterprise environments. This vulnerability poses significant risks, including:

• Unauthorized Access: Exploitation can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data and systems.
• Service Disruption: Successful attacks can disrupt services, leading to downtime and potential data loss.
• Reputation Damage: Compromises can damage an organization’s reputation and erode customer trust.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about this vulnerability?

To assess the risk posed by this vulnerability, consider asking vendors the following questions:

1. Can you confirm if you have updated all instances of CrushFTP to version 10.8.3 or 11.2.3 to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-53552?
2. Have you configured the Allowed Domains for Password Resets as recommended in the advisory to prevent unauthorized access through manipulated password reset links?
3. Can you confirm if you have taken measures to educate users about the legitimacy of password reset emails and the risks associated with clicking on malicious links?
4. Have you implemented any additional security measures to monitor and detect unusual activity that could indicate attempted exploitation of the CVE-2024-53552 vulnerability?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

Vendors should take the following actions to mitigate this vulnerability:

• Upgrade CrushFTP: Update to the latest secure versions:
  • CrushFTP 10.8.3 or later
  • CrushFTP 11.2.3 or later
• Configure Allowed Domains for Password Resets:
  • For version 10.x: Navigate to Preferences > WebInterface > MiniURL, and specify a comma-separated list of allowed domains.
  • For version 11.x: Go to Preferences > WebInterface > Login Page, and set a domain pattern that is not a wildcard (‘*’), as wildcards are no longer permitted.
• User Awareness: Inform users to be cautious with password reset emails and to verify the legitimacy of such requests before clicking on any links.
• Regular Monitoring: Regularly review system logs for any unusual activity that could indicate attempted exploitation.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite offers a FocusTag titled “CrushFTP Account Takeover,” which provides:

• Vendor Exposure Assessment: Identifies vendors potentially impacted by this vulnerability.
• Asset Information: Supplies details on assets (IP addresses and subdomains) that may be at risk, enabling targeted remediation efforts.
• Timely Updates: Ensures that TPRM professionals are informed about the latest developments and mitigations related to this vulnerability.

Gogs Server Path Traversal Vulnerabilities (CVE-2024-55947, CVE-2024-54148)

What Are the Gogs Server Path Traversal Vulnerabilities?

Gogs, an open-source self-hosted Git service, has been identified with two critical path traversal vulnerabilities. CVE-2024-55947 is a vulnerability in the file update API of Gogs that allows authenticated users to write files to arbitrary paths on the server. Exploiting this flaw could enable an attacker to gain unauthorized SSH access, compromising the integrity of the server. Similarly, CVE-2024-54148 affects the file editing UI of Gogs, where authenticated users can commit and edit crafted symbolic link (symlink) files within a repository. This manipulation can lead to unauthorized SSH access to the server, posing significant security risks. Both vulnerabilities have a CVSS score of 8.7, indicating high severity, with an EPSS score of 0.05%, suggesting a low likelihood of exploitation. These vulnerabilities were first reported on December 23, 2024. While PoC exploit code is publicly available, there is no evidence of active exploitation in the wild, and the vulnerabilities have not yet been added to the CISA’s KEV catalog. No advisory has been published by CISA at this time.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

Gogs is widely used for managing Git repositories, making it a critical component in many enterprise environments. These vulnerabilities can expose organizations to significant risks. Exploiting these flaws allows attackers to gain unauthorized SSH access to servers, which can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data, server compromises, or even the manipulation of critical code repositories. Such breaches could lead to service disruption, data loss, and severe reputational damage. Given the high severity of these vulnerabilities and their potential impact on systems that rely on Gogs for version control and collaboration, TPRM professionals should prioritize assessing the exposure of their vendors.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

To assess the risk posed by these vulnerabilities, TPRM professionals should ask the following questions:

1. Have you upgraded all instances of Gogs to version 0.13.1 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-55947 and CVE-2024-54148?
2. Can you confirm if you have inspected your existing repositories for any suspicious symlink files or unauthorized modifications that could indicate exploitation attempts of CVE-2024-54148?
3. Have you restricted repository access to trusted users until the upgrade to Gogs version 0.13.1 or later was completed to mitigate potential exploitation of CVE-2024-55947?
4. Have you implemented regular inspections of server logs for unusual activities, particularly those related to file editing and commits, to detect potential intrusion attempts related to CVE-2024-54148 and CVE-2024-55947?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

Vendors should take the following actions to mitigate the risks posed by these vulnerabilities:

• Upgrade Gogs: Immediately update to version 0.13.1 or later, where these vulnerabilities have been addressed.
• Restrict User Access: Until the upgrade is completed, limit repository access to trusted users only to mitigate potential exploitation.
• Review Repository Contents: Examine existing repositories for any suspicious symlink files or unauthorized modifications that could indicate exploitation attempts.
• Monitor Server Logs: Regularly inspect server logs for unusual activities, particularly those related to file editing and commits, to detect potential intrusion attempts.
• Implement Security Best Practices: Ensure that your Gogs instance follows security best practices, including proper configuration and regular updates, to prevent similar vulnerabilities in the future.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for these vulnerabilities

Black Kite offers a FocusTag titled “Gogs Server,” which provides the following benefits:

• Vendor Exposure Assessment: Identifies vendors potentially impacted by these vulnerabilities.
• Asset Information: Provides details on assets (IP addresses and subdomains) that may be at risk, enabling targeted remediation efforts.
• Timely Updates: Ensures that TPRM professionals are informed about the latest developments and mitigations related to these vulnerabilities.

Enhancing TPRM Strategies With Black Kite’s FocusTags™

In the face of increasingly sophisticated cyber threats, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ stand as a beacon for proactive Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM). This week’s vulnerabilities highlight the pressing need for targeted, efficient, and informed risk management strategies. Here’s how FocusTags™ enhance TPRM practices:

• Real-Time Risk Identification: Instantly pinpoint vendors impacted by the latest vulnerabilities, enabling rapid responses that mitigate potential threats.
• Strategic Risk Prioritization: Evaluate risks based on the criticality of vendors and the severity of vulnerabilities, ensuring focused efforts where they matter most.
• Informed Vendor Conversations: Provide the intelligence necessary to engage vendors in detailed discussions about their exposure and response strategies, fostering transparency and collaboration.
• Strengthened Cybersecurity Ecosystems: Deliver a comprehensive view of the evolving threat landscape, empowering organizations to build resilient and adaptive security frameworks.

By transforming complex cybersecurity data into actionable insights, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ revolutionize TPRM, ensuring businesses can protect their supply chains and partners against even the most sophisticated cyber threats. As vulnerabilities continue to emerge, these tags provide the clarity and precision needed for proactive and effective risk management.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags^TM in the Last 30 Days:

• Apache Tomcat RCE: CVE-2024-56337, CVE-2024-50379, Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition Vulnerability, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Apache Tomcat.
• CrushFTP: CVE-2024-53552, Account Takeover Vulnerability in CrushFTP.
• Gogs Server: CVE-2024-55947, CVE-2024-54148, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Gogs Server.
• BeyondTrust PRA RS: CVE-2024-12356, Command Injection Vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s  Privileged Remote Access (PRA), Remote Support (RS).
• Ivanti Cloud Services Application: CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, CVE-2024-11772, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Command Injection Vulnerability, and  RCE Vulnerability  SQLi Vulnerability in Ivanti Cloud Services Application.
• Cleo File Transfer: CVE-2024-50623, CVE-2024-55956, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Unrestricted File Upload and Download Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, LexiCom.
• Qlik Sense Enterprise: CVE-2024-55579, CVE-2024-55580, Arbitrary EXE Execution Vulnerability Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Qlik Sense Enterprise.
• SAP NetWeaver JAVA: CVE-2024-47578, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA (Adobe Document Services).
• PAN-OS: CVE-2024-0012, CVE-2024-9474, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability and Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Palo Alto’s PAN-OS.
• PostgreSQL: CVE-2024-10979, Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability in PostgreSQL.
• Apache Airflow: CVE-2024-45784, Debug Messages Revealing Unnecessary Information in Apache Airflow.

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-56337

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-50379

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-56337-apache-tomcat-patches-critical-rce-vulnerability

https://securityonline.info/rce-and-dos-vulnerabilities-addressed-in-apache-tomcat-cve-2024-50379-and-cve-2024-54677

https://lists.apache.org/thread/b2b9qrgjrz1kvo4ym8y2wkfdvwoq6qbp

https://github.com/Alchemist3dot14/CVE-2024-50379

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53552

https://www.crushftp.com/crush11wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Update

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-53552-cvss-9-8-crushftp-flaw-exposes-users-to-account-takeover

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55947

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-54148

https://github.com/gogs/gogs/releases

The post Focus Friday: TPRM Insights on Apache Tomcat, CrushFTP, and Gogs Server Vulnerabilities appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

​​Welcome to this week’s Focus Friday, where we delve into high-profile vulnerabilities and provide actionable insights from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This edition explores critical vulnerabilities in Cleo File Transfer, BeyondTrust PRA RS, and Ivanti Cloud Services Application. These vulnerabilities, including remote code execution and command injection, could potentially compromise sensitive data and disrupt operations across industries. These vulnerabilities demand immediate attention from TPRM professionals to mitigate risks effectively. Let’s explore the risks, the recommended remediations, and how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ streamline the risk management process for these pressing concerns.

CVE-2024-55956 in Cleo File Transfer Software

What are the critical vulnerabilities in Cleo File Transfer software?

In our Focus Friday blog post last week, we discussed Cleo’s critical vulnerability, CVE-2024-50623. This week, we need to focus on CVE-2024-55956, which affects Cleo File Transfer products, and the systemic risks these vulnerabilities pose.

In our December 18 article titled “CL0P’s Exploitation of Cleo Directly Endangers the Supply Chain,” we detailed how the CL0P ransomware group has been exploiting vulnerabilities in Cleo’s software to threaten supply chains. 

Two critical vulnerabilities have been identified in Cleo Harmony®, Cleo VLTrader®, and Cleo LexiCom® products:

CVE-2024-55956 is the Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, and LexiCom versions prior to 5.8.0.24, enabling unauthenticated users to execute arbitrary Bash or PowerShell commands by exploiting default settings in the Autorun directory. 

Both vulnerabilities have been actively exploited. CVE-2024-50623 was added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on December 13, 2024.  CISA  CVE-2024-55956 was added on December 17, 2024. Cleo has released patches to address these issues, and users are strongly advised to update to the latest versions to mitigate potential risks. 

Both vulnerabilities have public PoC exploit codes, and exploitation has been observed targeting industries like logistics and shipping. They enable unauthorized file uploads and remote execution of malicious commands.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

These vulnerabilities represent significant risks for organizations relying on Cleo file transfer solutions:

1. Critical Operational Risk: Exploitation could lead to compromised file transfers, impacting supply chain and logistics operations.
2. Sensitive Data Exposure: Malicious actors could access and exfiltrate confidential business data.
3. Unauthorized Access: Successful exploitation provides attackers with system-level access, enabling further attacks on connected systems.

For organizations utilizing Cleo products, timely mitigation is essential to avoid disruption and ensure data security.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

1. Have you updated all instances of Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, and LexiCom to version 5.8.0.24 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-50623 and CVE-2024-55956?
2. Have you reviewed and appropriately configured the Autorun directory’s default settings to prevent unauthorized command execution related to CVE-2024-55956?
3. Can you confirm if you have blocked the attacker IPs mentioned in the advisory shared last week, including 176[.]123[.]5[.]126, 5[.]149[.]249[.]226, 185[.]181[.]230[.]103, 209[.]127[.]12[.]38, 181[.]214[.]147[.]164, and 192[.]119[.]99[.]42, to prevent further exploitation of CVE-2024-50623 and CVE-2024-55956?
4. Have you disabled the Autorun functionality in the ‘Configure’ menu of LexiCom, Harmony, or VLTrader to stop processing autorun files and mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-55956?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

To address these vulnerabilities, vendors should:

1. Immediate Software Update: Upgrade all instances of Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, and LexiCom to version 5.8.0.24 or later to mitigate the vulnerability.
2. Review Autorun Directory Settings: Ensure that the Autorun directory’s default settings are appropriately configured to prevent unauthorized command execution.
3. Block Malicious IPs: Consider blocking attacker IPs, including 176.123.5.126, 5.149.249.226, 185.181.230.103, 209.127.12.38, 181.214.147.164, 192.119.99.42.
4. Monitor for Indicators of Compromise (IOCs): Check if suspicious files, such as main.xml or 60282967-dc91-40ef-a34c-38e992509c2c.xml, healthchecktemplate.txt, or healthcheck.txt, contain encoded malicious commands. The attack also utilizes reconnaissance tools like nltest.exe for Active Directory enumeration.
5. Monitor Updates: Cleo is actively working on a new patch expected soon. Monitor updates from Cleo to ensure you apply the latest mitigations as they are released.
6. Reconfigure Software Settings: Disable the autorun feature by clearing the ‘Autorun Directory’ field in configuration settings to prevent automatic execution of malicious files.
7. Place Systems Behind a Firewall: Ensure internet-facing Cleo systems are placed behind a firewall to limit exposure to potential attacks.
8. Implement Strong Security Practices: Enforce strong, unique passwords and enable multi-factor authentication (MFA) to enhance security.
9. Disable Autorun Functionality: Access the “Configure” menu in LexiCom, Harmony, or VLTrader. Select “Options” and navigate to the “Other” pane. Delete the contents of the “Autorun Directory” field to stop processing autorun files.
10. Address Remaining Exposure: Note that this mitigates part of the attack but does not address the root cause of the vulnerability.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite published the Cleo File Transfer FocusTag™ on December 13, 2024, providing actionable insights for TPRM professionals. This tag identifies vendors using affected versions and details exposed assets like subdomains and IP addresses.

With Black Kite, TPRM professionals can:

• Prioritize vendors requiring urgent remediation based on exposure.
• Streamline risk assessments using targeted questions and vendor-specific intelligence.
• Enhance oversight by monitoring identified vulnerable assets.

This FocusTag™ ensures efficient vendor management and proactive risk mitigation, empowering TPRM professionals to address critical vulnerabilities effectively.

CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, and CVE-2024-11773 in Ivanti Cloud Services Application

The Ivanti Cloud Services Appliance (CSA) is an internet-facing device that facilitates secure communication between remote endpoints and the central Ivanti Endpoint Manager core server. It enables organizations to manage devices outside their corporate network, ensuring that endpoints can receive updates, patches, and policies regardless of their location. The key features of the Ivanti Cloud Services Appliance (CSA) include: Secure Remote Management, Certificate-Based Authentication, Support for Multiple Appliances, and Virtual Appliance Option.

What are the critical vulnerabilities in Ivanti Cloud Services Application?

These vulnerabilities impact versions of Ivanti CSA prior to 5.0.3 and include the following:

CVE-2024-11639 is an authentication bypass vulnerability in the admin web console of Ivanti Cloud Services Appliance (CSA) versions before 5.0.3, allowing remote unauthenticated attackers to gain administrative access. 

CVE-2024-11772 is a command injection vulnerability in the admin web console of Ivanti CSA before version 5.0.3, enabling remote authenticated attackers with administrative privileges to execute arbitrary code on the server. 

CVE-2024-11773 is an SQL injection vulnerability in the admin web console of Ivanti CSA before version 5.0.3, allowing remote authenticated attackers with administrative privileges to execute arbitrary SQL statements. 

All three vulnerabilities are critical, with CVE-2024-11639 having a CVSS score of 10.0, and both CVE-2024-11772 and CVE-2024-11773 each having a CVSS score of 9.1.

These vulnerabilities were first disclosed on December 10, 2024, with no current evidence of exploitation in the wild. However, considering the history of rapid exploitation of Ivanti vulnerabilities, immediate action is advised. They are not yet listed in CISA’s KEV catalog.

Why should TPRM professionals care about these vulnerabilities?

For TPRM professionals, these vulnerabilities in Ivanti CSA could lead to severe business risks:

• Compromised Administrative Access: Unauthorized access to the admin web console may result in full control of systems managing critical IT infrastructure.
• Arbitrary Code Execution: Attackers could deploy malicious software, escalating risks to other connected systems.
• SQL Injection Risks: Exploited vulnerabilities could enable attackers to manipulate databases, potentially exposing sensitive organizational data.

Organizations leveraging Ivanti CSA for IT management need to ensure their vendors have addressed these risks to prevent potential disruptions and data breaches.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about these vulnerabilities?

1. Have you updated all instances of Ivanti CSA to version 5.0.3 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, and CVE-2024-11773?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented continuous monitoring for unusual activities in the admin web console to detect potential exploitation of the authentication bypass, command injection, and SQL injection vulnerabilities?
3. Have you enforced strong, unique passwords and enabled multi-factor authentication for all administrative accounts to prevent unauthorized administrative access related to CVE-2024-11639?
4. Can you confirm if you have restricted administrative access to the CSA to only authorized personnel to prevent potential exploitation of CVE-2024-11772 and CVE-2024-11773?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

Vendors using Ivanti CSA should implement the following recommendations:

1. Upgrade to Ivanti CSA version 5.0.3: This update resolves these vulnerabilities and is available via the Ivanti download portal.
2. Restrict Administrative Access: Limit access to authorized personnel only and enforce MFA.
3. Monitor for Unusual Activity: Implement continuous monitoring for signs of exploitation in the admin web console.
4. Review Database Activity: Ensure SQL queries are logged and anomalous activity is flagged.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite published the Ivanti Cloud Services Application FocusTag™ on December 13, 2024, providing actionable insights. This tag identifies vendors potentially exposed to these vulnerabilities, detailing the affected assets, including subdomains and IP addresses.

By leveraging these insights, TPRM professionals can:

• Narrow the scope to vendors with confirmed exposure to affected Ivanti CSA versions.
• Prioritize outreach to these vendors using the specific questions provided.
• Address potential risks more efficiently with the detailed intelligence provided.

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ eliminate the guesswork in identifying vulnerable vendors, streamlining the risk assessment process for TPRM professionals.

CVE-2024-12356 in BeyondTrust PRA and RS

What is the BeyondTrust PRA and RS Command Injection Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-12356 is a critical command injection vulnerability affecting BeyondTrust’s Privileged Remote Access (PRA) and Remote Support (RS) solutions. It allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute operating system commands as the site user by sending malicious client requests. A vulnerability with a CVSS score of 9.8 has been identified, affecting PRA and RS software versions up to and including 24.3.1. Publicly disclosed on December 16, 2024, this vulnerability poses a significant security risk due to the availability of PoC exploit code, making it a high-priority target for attackers despite no reports of active exploitation thus far. The vulnerability’s critical nature has also led to its inclusion in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) Catalog on December 19, 2024. With an EPSS score of 0.05%, organizations using the affected versions are urged to address this issue promptly to mitigate potential risks.

The vulnerability stems from improper neutralization of special elements used in commands, making it exploitable via a low-complexity attack. BeyondTrust has released patches for all supported versions (22.1.x and above).

Why should TPRM professionals care about this vulnerability?

BeyondTrust’s PRA and RS solutions are widely used for privileged remote access and IT support, making them an attractive target for attackers. Exploitation of this vulnerability could:

1. Compromise Sensitive Systems: Grant unauthorized access to critical infrastructure and systems.
2. Enable Further Attacks: Attackers could escalate privileges, deploy malware, or steal sensitive information.
3. Disrupt Operations: Unauthorized access to IT management systems could lead to downtime or operational disruption.

Organizations using BeyondTrust products need to address this vulnerability urgently to protect against potential exploitation.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about this vulnerability?

1. Can you confirm if you have upgraded all instances of BeyondTrust’s Privileged Remote Access (PRA) and Remote Support (RS) products to a version higher than 24.3.1 to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-12356?
2. If you are operating on a version older than 22.1, have you upgraded to a supported version to access the patches for the command injection vulnerability identified as CVE-2024-12356?
3. Have you applied the appropriate patch (BT24-10-ONPREM1 or BT24-10-ONPREM2, depending on the version) via the /appliance interface to address the CVE-2024-12356 vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s PRA and RS products?
4. Have you implemented continuous monitoring systems to detect any unusual activity that may indicate attempted exploitation of the CVE-2024-12356 vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s PRA and RS products?

Remediation recommendations for vendors subject to this risk

To mitigate the risks associated with CVE-2024-12356, vendors should:

1. Apply the Patch: Install BT24-10-ONPREM1 or BT24-10-ONPREM2 for versions 22.1.x or above.
2. Upgrade Older Versions: For unsupported versions (older than 22.1), upgrade to a supported version before applying the patch.
3. Verify Patch Application: Ensure successful deployment of the patch, particularly for on-premise instances.
4. Monitor for Indicators: Regularly review logs for suspicious activity tied to command injection attempts.
5. Implement Security Best Practices: Enforce multi-factor authentication (MFA) and use strong, unique passwords to secure administrative accounts.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite released the BeyondTrust PRA RS FocusTag™ on December 19, 2024, offering detailed insights into vendors potentially impacted by CVE-2024-12356. The tag provides:

• Identification of affected vendors with PRA and RS deployments.
• Details on exposed assets, including IP addresses and subdomains.

TPRM professionals can use these insights to:

• Narrow down their scope to vendors with confirmed exposure.
• Prioritize outreach to affected vendors and provide actionable guidance.
• Leverage asset data to enhance risk assessments and address vulnerabilities proactively.

ENHANCING TPRM STRATEGIES WITH BLACK KITE’S FocusTags™

In the face of increasingly sophisticated cyber threats, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ stand as a beacon for proactive Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM). This week’s vulnerabilities—spanning critical systems like Cleo File Transfer, BeyondTrust PRA RS, and Ivanti Cloud Services Application—highlight the pressing need for targeted, efficient, and informed risk management strategies. Here’s how FocusTags™ enhance TPRM practices:

• Real-Time Risk Identification: Instantly pinpoint vendors impacted by the latest vulnerabilities, enabling rapid responses that mitigate potential threats.
• Strategic Risk Prioritization: Evaluate risks based on the criticality of vendors and the severity of vulnerabilities, ensuring focused efforts where they matter most.
• Informed Vendor Conversations: Provide the intelligence necessary to engage vendors in detailed discussions about their exposure and response strategies, fostering transparency and collaboration.
• Strengthened Cybersecurity Ecosystems: Deliver a comprehensive view of the evolving threat landscape, empowering organizations to build resilient and adaptive security frameworks.

By transforming complex cybersecurity data into actionable insights, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ revolutionize TPRM, ensuring businesses can protect their supply chains and partners against even the most sophisticated cyber threats. As vulnerabilities continue to emerge, these tags provide the clarity and precision needed for proactive and effective risk management.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags^TM in the Last 30 Days:

• BeyondTrust PRA RS: CVE-2024-12356, Command Injection Vulnerability in BeyondTrust’s  Privileged Remote Access (PRA), Remote Support (RS).
• Ivanti Cloud Services Application: CVE-2024-11639, CVE-2024-11772, CVE-2024-11772, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Command Injection Vulnerability, and  RCE Vulnerability  SQLi Vulnerability in Ivanti Cloud Services Application.
• Cleo File Transfer: CVE-2024-50623, CVE-2024-55956, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Unrestricted File Upload and Download Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, LexiCom.
• Qlik Sense Enterprise: CVE-2024-55579, CVE-2024-55580, Arbitrary EXE Execution Vulnerability Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Qlik Sense Enterprise.
• SAP NetWeaver JAVA: CVE-2024-47578, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA (Adobe Document Services).
• PAN-OS: CVE-2024-0012, CVE-2024-9474, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability and Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Palo Alto’s PAN-OS.
• PostgreSQL: CVE-2024-10979, Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability in PostgreSQL.
• Apache Airflow: CVE-2024-45784, Debug Messages Revealing Unnecessary Information in Apache Airflow.
• Atlassian Jira: CVE-2021-26086, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Atlassian Jira Server and Data Center.
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-9420, CVE-2024-47906, CVE-2024-38655, CVE-2024-38656, CVE-2024-39710, CVE-2024-11007, CVE-2024-11006, CVE-2024-11005, and CVE-2024-11004, Use-After-Free, Stack-Based Buffer Overflow, Argument Injection, and Reflected XSS Vulnerabilities in Ivanti Connect Secure.

References

https://blackkite.com/blog/focus-friday-tprm-insights-on-qlik-sense-cleo-file-transfer-and-sap-netweaver-java-vulnerabilities

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55956

https://support.cleo.com/hc/en-us/articles/28408134019735-Cleo-Product-Security-Update-CVE-2024-55956

https://attackerkb.com/topics/geR0H8dgrE/cve-2024-55956/rapid7-analysis

https://www.huntress.com/blog/threat-advisory-oh-no-cleo-cleo-software-actively-being-exploited-in-the-wild

https://forums.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-Ivanti-Cloud-Services-Application-CSA-CVE-2024-11639-CVE-2024-11772-CVE-2024-11773?language=en_US

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11639

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11772

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11773

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-11639-cvss-10-critical-flaw-in-ivanti-cloud-services-application-immediate-patch-recommended

https://www.beyondtrust.com/trust-center/security-advisories/bt24-10

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12356

https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/12/18/beyondtrust-fixes-critical-vulnerability-in-remote-access-support-solutions-cve-2024-12356

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-12356-cvss-9-8-critical-vulnerability-in-beyondtrust-pra-and-rs-enables-remote-code-execution

The post Focus Friday: TPRM Insights On Cleo File Transfer, BeyondTrust PRA and RS, and Ivanti Cloud Services Application Vulnerabilities appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s Focus Friday blog! As the cybersecurity landscape evolves, organizations are tasked with managing an ever-growing array of threats, especially within their vendor ecosystems. Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals play a crucial role in safeguarding operations against vulnerabilities that could ripple through the supply chain. This week, we delve into three critical vulnerabilities affecting Qlik Sense Enterprise, Cleo File Transfer software, and SAP NetWeaver JAVA. Each of these incidents highlights the importance of proactive risk management and showcases how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ empower organizations to stay ahead of emerging threats.

CVE-2024-55579 and CVE-2024-55580: Critical Vulnerabilities in Qlik Sense Enterprise

What are the vulnerabilities in Qlik Sense Enterprise?

Qlik Sense Enterprise for Windows has been identified with two critical vulnerabilities:

CVE-2024-55579 vulnerability allows unprivileged users with network access to create connection objects that can trigger the execution of arbitrary executable files on the Qlik Sense server. It has a CVSS score of 8.8, indicating high severity. CVE-2024-55580: This flaw enables unprivileged users with network access to execute remote commands, potentially causing significant impacts on system availability, integrity, and confidentiality. It carries a CVSS score of 7.5.

Both vulnerabilities were publicly disclosed on December 8, 2024. As of now, there is no evidence of active exploitation in the wild, and they have not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Qlik has released security patches to address these issues and strongly advises immediate application to mitigate associated risks.

Why should TPRM professionals be concerned about these vulnerabilities?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be vigilant regarding these vulnerabilities due to the following reasons:

• Data Compromise: Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access and manipulation of sensitive data, undermining data integrity and confidentiality.
• Operational Disruption: Successful attacks may disrupt business intelligence operations, affecting decision-making processes and overall business performance.
• Supply Chain Risk: If vendors or partners utilize Qlik Sense Enterprise, their vulnerabilities could cascade, impacting your organization’s security posture.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors regarding these vulnerabilities?

To assess and mitigate risks associated with these vulnerabilities, consider posing the following questions to your vendors:

1. Have you updated all instances of Qlik Sense Enterprise for Windows to the latest patched version to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-55579 and CVE-2024-55580?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented the workaround provided in Qlik’s advisory to ensure proper functionality of all extensions and visualizations post-update?
3. Have you restricted network access to trusted users to minimize unauthorized exploitation of the vulnerabilities CVE-2024-55579 and CVE-2024-55580?
4. Are you continuously monitoring your network traffic to detect unusual activity and mitigate potential exploitation attempts related to the vulnerabilities CVE-2024-55579 and CVE-2024-55580?

Remediation recommendations for vendors affected by these vulnerabilities

Vendors utilizing Qlik Sense Enterprise should implement the following remediation steps:

1. Immediate Patching: Apply the latest security patches released by Qlik for Qlik Sense Enterprise for Windows.
2. Access Control Review: Ensure that only authorized users have network access to Qlik Sense servers, adhering to the principle of least privilege.
3. Monitoring and Detection: Implement monitoring solutions to detect any anomalous activities indicative of exploitation attempts.
4. Incident Response Preparedness: Develop and test incident response plans specifically addressing potential exploitation of these vulnerabilities.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite’s FocusTags^TM regarding these vulnerabilities?

Black Kite has issued a FocusTag™ for Qlik Sense Enterprise, enabling TPRM professionals to:

• Identify At-Risk Vendors: Determine which vendors may be affected by these vulnerabilities.
• Access Vulnerable Asset Information: Obtain details about specific assets, such as IP addresses and subdomains, that could be compromised.
• Prioritize Risk Mitigation: Focus efforts on vendors with the highest risk exposure, streamlining the remediation process.

CVE-2024-50623: Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Cleo File Transfer Software

What is the Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Cleo File Transfer Software?

CVE-2024-50623 is a high-severity unrestricted file upload and download vulnerability affecting Cleo’s file transfer products: Harmony®, VLTrader®, and LexiCom®, in versions prior to 5.8.0.21. This flaw allows attackers to upload malicious files to the software’s autorun directory, which are then automatically executed, enabling remote code execution. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.8. It was publicly disclosed on December 10, 2024. PoC exploit code is available, and active exploitation has been observed in the wild, notably by the Termite ransomware group targeting sectors such as logistics, shipping, and consumer products. As of now, this vulnerability has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

We published an article on December 11, 2024, stating that the Cleo vulnerability (CVE-2024-50623) was actively exploited by ransomware groups. You can find more details in the related blog post.

Why should TPRM professionals be concerned about this vulnerability?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be attentive to this vulnerability due to its potential impact on data integrity and operational continuity. Exploitation can lead to unauthorized access and control over systems, resulting in data breaches, service disruptions, and propagation of malware across networks. Given the widespread use of Cleo’s file transfer solutions among vendors and partners, this vulnerability poses a significant supply chain risk, potentially affecting interconnected systems and data exchanges.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors regarding this vulnerability?

To assess and mitigate risks associated with CVE-2024-50623, TPRM professionals should inquire:

1. Have you identified any instances of CVE-2024-50623 within your systems?
2. Have you applied the security patches provided by Cleo to address this vulnerability?
3. What measures are in place to detect and prevent exploitation attempts related to this vulnerability?
4. How do you ensure that your use of Cleo’s file transfer software does not introduce security risks to our organization?

Remediation recommendations for vendors affected by this vulnerability

Vendors utilizing Cleo’s file transfer products should implement the following remediation steps:

1. Immediate Software Update: Upgrade all instances of Cleo Harmony®, VLTrader®, and LexiCom® to version 5.8.0.21 or later to mitigate the vulnerability.
2. Disable Autorun Functionality: Access the “Configure” menu in the software, select “Options,” navigate to the “Other” pane, and clear the contents of the “Autorun Directory” field to prevent automatic execution of files.
3. Place Systems Behind a Firewall: Ensure internet-facing Cleo systems are placed behind a firewall to limit exposure to potential attacks.
4. Monitor for Indicators of Compromise (IOCs): Check for suspicious IPs and suspicious files, such as main.xml or 60282967-dc91-40ef-a34c-38e992509c2c.xml, which may contain encoded malicious commands.
5. Block Malicious IPs: Consider blocking attacker IPs, including 176[.]123[.]5[.]126, 5[.]149[.]249[.]226, 185[.]181[.]230[.]103, 209[.]127[.]12[.]38, 181[.]214[.]147[.]164, 192[.]119[.]99[.]42
6. Implement Strong Security Practices: Enforce strong, unique passwords and enable multi-factor authentication (MFA) to enhance security.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite’s FocusTags^TM regarding this vulnerability?

Black Kite has issued a FocusTag™ for Cleo File Transfer, enabling TPRM professionals to:

• Identify At-Risk Vendors: Determine which vendors may be affected by CVE-2024-50623.
• Access Vulnerable Asset Information: Obtain details about specific assets, such as IP addresses and subdomains, that could be compromised.
• Prioritize Risk Mitigation: Focus efforts on vendors with the highest risk exposure, streamlining the remediation process.

CVE-2024-47578: Server-Side Request Forgery Vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA

What is the SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA SSRF Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-47578 is a critical Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA, specifically within the Adobe Document Services component. An attacker with administrator privileges can exploit this flaw by sending crafted requests from a vulnerable web application, targeting internal systems behind firewalls that are typically inaccessible from external networks. Successful exploitation enables the attacker to read or modify any file and potentially render the entire system unavailable. It has a CVSS score of 9.1, indicating critical severity. SAP has released a security patch addressing this vulnerability and strongly recommends immediate application to mitigate associated risks.

Why should TPRM professionals be concerned about this vulnerability?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be concerned about CVE-2024-47578 due to its potential to compromise data confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Exploitation of this vulnerability can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive information and disruption of critical business operations. Given the widespread use of SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA among vendors, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the supply chain, potentially affecting interconnected systems and data exchanges.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors regarding this vulnerability?

To assess and mitigate risks associated with CVE-2024-47578, TPRM professionals should inquire:

1. Have you updated all instances of SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA (Adobe Document Services) to the latest version as per SAP Security Note 3536965 to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-47578, CVE-2024-47579, and CVE-2024-47580?
2. Can you confirm if you have restricted administrative access to essential personnel only and enforced the principle of least privilege to prevent potential exploitation of the Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA?
3. What specific measures have you implemented to monitor network traffic and detect suspicious activities that could indicate an exploitation of the vulnerabilities CVE-2024-47579 and CVE-2024-47580, which allow access to sensitive server files through exposed web services?
4. Can you confirm if you have reviewed and updated your firewall configurations to ensure that internal systems are appropriately segmented and protected from unauthorized access, specifically in relation to the SSRF vulnerability CVE-2024-47578 in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA?

Remediation recommendations for vendors affected by this vulnerability

Vendors utilizing SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA should implement the following remediation steps:

1. Immediate Software Update: Apply the security patch provided by SAP as per SAP Security Note 3536965 to address the vulnerability.
2. Restrict Administrative Access: Limit administrative privileges to essential personnel and enforce the principle of least privilege.
3. Monitor Network Traffic: Implement monitoring to detect and respond to suspicious activities promptly.
4. Review Firewall Configurations: Ensure that internal systems are appropriately segmented and protected from unauthorized access.

How can TPRM professionals leverage Black Kite’s FocusTags^TM regarding this vulnerability?

Black Kite has issued a FocusTag™ for SAP NetWeaver, enabling TPRM professionals to:

• Identify At-Risk Vendors: Determine which vendors may be affected by CVE-2024-47578.
• Access Vulnerable Asset Information: Obtain details about specific assets, such as IP addresses and subdomains, that could be compromised.
• Prioritize Risk Mitigation: Focus efforts on vendors with the highest risk exposure, streamlining the remediation process.

Enhancing TPRM Strategies with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

In today’s dynamic cybersecurity environment, managing third-party risks requires precision and timely intelligence. Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are an indispensable tool for organizations navigating critical vulnerabilities like those in Qlik Sense Enterprise, Cleo File Transfer, and SAP NetWeaver JAVA. These tags are designed to provide:

• Real-Time Risk Insights: Quickly identify vendors impacted by specific vulnerabilities, enabling immediate action.
• Targeted Prioritization: Focus efforts on high-severity vulnerabilities and vendors most critical to your operations.
• Tailored Vendor Communication: Facilitate targeted discussions with vendors, addressing their specific security measures and vulnerabilities.
• Comprehensive Threat Visibility: Gain a holistic view of the threat landscape, empowering more strategic decision-making.

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ transform complex cybersecurity challenges into actionable intelligence, allowing TPRM professionals to mitigate risks efficiently and strengthen overall security. By leveraging these insights, organizations can proactively address vulnerabilities, ensuring resilience in an ever-evolving threat landscape.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags^TM in the Last 30 Days:

• Qlik Sense Enterprise: CVE-2024-55579, CVE-2024-55580, Arbitrary EXE Execution Vulnerability Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Qlik Sense Enterprise.
• Cleo File Transfer: Remote Code Execution Vulnerability, Unrestricted File Upload and Download Vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, LexiCom.
• SAP NetWeaver JAVA: CVE-2024-47578, Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver AS for JAVA (Adobe Document Services).
• PAN-OS: CVE-2024-0012, CVE-2024-9474, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability and Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Palo Alto’s PAN-OS.
• PostgreSQL: CVE-2024-10979, Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability in PostgreSQL.
• Apache Airflow: CVE-2024-45784, Debug Messages Revealing Unnecessary Information in Apache Airflow.
• Atlassian Jira: CVE-2021-26086, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Atlassian Jira Server and Data Center.
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-9420, CVE-2024-47906, CVE-2024-38655, CVE-2024-38656, CVE-2024-39710, CVE-2024-11007, CVE-2024-11006, CVE-2024-11005, and CVE-2024-11004, Use-After-Free, Stack-Based Buffer Overflow, Argument Injection, and Reflected XSS Vulnerabilities in Ivanti Connect Secure.
• Nostromo nhttpd: CVE-2019-16278, Path Traversal Vulnerability, RCE Vulnerability in Nostromo nhttpd.
• LiteSpeed Cache: CVE-2024-50550, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability iin LiteSpeed Cache plugin.
• RICOH Web Image Monitor: CVE-2024-47939, Buffer Overflow Vulnerability in RICOH Web Image Monitor.
• Squid Proxy: CVE-2024-45802, DoS Vulnerability in Squid Proxy Servers.
• XLight FTP: CVE-2024-46483, Integer Overflow and RCE Vulnerabilities in XLight FTP Servers.
• Exchange Server RCE: CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-26857, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Exchange Server.

References

https://blackkite.com/blog/when-ransomware-ruins-the-supply-chain-lessons-from-blue-yonder-and-the-rise-of-termite-ransomware-group

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55579

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55580

https://community.qlik.com/t5/Official-Support-Articles/High-Security-fixes-for-Qlik-Sense-Enterprise-for-Windows-CVEs/tac-p/2496004

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-55579-cve-2024-55580-qlik-sense-users-face-serious-security-risk

https://support.cleo.com/hc/en-us/articles/27140294267799-Cleo-Product-Security-Advisory

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-50623

https://www.huntress.com/blog/threat-advisory-oh-no-cleo-cleo-software-actively-being-exploited-in-the-wild

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-50623-critical-vulnerability-in-cleo-software-actively-exploited-in-the-wild

https://github.com/watchtowrlabs/CVE-2024-50623

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47578

https://support.sap.com/en/my-support/knowledge-base/security-notes-news/december-2024.html

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-47578-cvss-9-1-sap-issues-critical-patch-for-netweaver-as-for-java

The post Focus Friday: TPRM Insights on Qlik Sense, Cleo File Transfer, And SAP NetWeaver JAVA Vulnerabilities appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

This week’s Focus Friday blog delves into critical vulnerabilities affecting widely used systems: PAN-OS, Apache Airflow, and PostgreSQL. These vulnerabilities, ranging from authentication bypass and privilege escalation to sensitive data exposure and arbitrary code execution, highlight the evolving threat landscape faced by organizations worldwide. From a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective, understanding these vulnerabilities and their implications is vital for maintaining a robust security posture across the supply chain. In this blog, we explore the technical details, potential impacts, and how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ empower organizations to respond effectively to these threats.

CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474: PAN-OS Authentication Bypass and Privilege Escalation Vulnerabilities

What Are the PAN-OS Authentication Bypass and Privilege Escalation Vulnerabilities?

CVE-2024-0012 is a critical authentication bypass vulnerability in PAN-OS, published on November 18, 2024. This flaw allows unauthenticated attackers with network access to the management web interface to gain administrative privileges. Exploitation enables tampering with configurations, executing administrative actions, and leveraging other vulnerabilities such as CVE-2024-9474. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.3 and is actively exploited.

CVE-2024-9474 is a medium-severity privilege escalation vulnerability in PAN-OS, also published on November 18, 2024. This flaw enables attackers with administrative access to escalate their privileges to root level, leading to complete system compromise. It has a CVSS score of 6.9 and is actively exploited in the wild.

Both vulnerabilities have been listed in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on November 18, 2024.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474?

PAN-OS is a critical component of enterprise network security. Exploitation of these vulnerabilities poses severe risks, including:

• Compromised administrative control: Attackers can bypass authentication and escalate privileges to root level, allowing full control over firewalls and related systems.
• Data breaches: Sensitive data and configurations may be accessed or modified.
• Lateral movement: Attackers can use compromised systems to launch further attacks, threatening the entire network.

For TPRM professionals, vendors utilizing PAN-OS could become entry points for malicious activity, necessitating immediate evaluation and action.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474?

To assess the vendor’s mitigation efforts for these vulnerabilities, ask:

1. Have you upgraded all PAN-OS devices to patched versions (10.2.12-h2, 11.0.6-h1, 11.1.5-h1, or 11.2.4-h1 or later)?
2. Have you restricted management interface access to trusted internal IP addresses and avoided exposing it to the internet as a precaution against the exploitation of CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474?
3. Are you using Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention capabilities to block attack signatures for these vulnerabilities including Threat IDs 95746, 95747, 95752, 95753, 95759, and 95763?
4. Can you confirm if you have implemented the recommended actions such as continuously monitoring network traffic for unusual activity and securing management access with a jump box or other hardened mechanisms to prevent exploitation of CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Affected by CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474

Vendors should take the following actions to mitigate these vulnerabilities:

• Upgrade PAN-OS: Install versions 10.2.12-h2, 11.0.6-h1, 11.1.5-h1, or 11.2.4-h1 or later.
• Restrict Access: Limit management web interface access to trusted internal IPs and avoid exposing it to the internet.
• Enable Threat Prevention: Use Palo Alto Networks Threat IDs (e.g., 95746, 95747) to block known attack vectors.
• Monitor Activity: Regularly review logs for unusual administrative actions or traffic patterns.
• Implement Role-Based Controls: Restrict root-level access to essential administrative users only.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for these vulnerabilities, published on November 19, 2024 (with updates on November 20, 2024), provides TPRM professionals with critical insights, including:

• Identification of affected vendors: Black Kite helps pinpoint vendors with potential exposure to these vulnerabilities.
• Detailed asset information: This includes IP addresses and subdomains associated with the vulnerabilities.
• Streamlined prioritization: Professionals can focus their efforts on vendors with the highest risk exposure, ensuring efficient remediation.

CVE-2024-10979: PostgreSQL Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability

What is the PostgreSQL Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-10979 is a high-severity vulnerability in PostgreSQL’s PL/Perl procedural language, identified on November 14, 2024. This flaw allows unprivileged database users to manipulate environment variables, such as PATH, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.8. As of now, there is no evidence of active exploitation in the wild, and it has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2024-10979?

PostgreSQL is a widely used relational database management system across various industries. A vulnerability that permits arbitrary code execution poses significant risks, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, system compromise, and potential lateral movement within an organization’s network. For Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals, this vulnerability is particularly concerning when vendors utilize PostgreSQL in their operations, as it could lead to compromised data integrity and confidentiality.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2024-10979?

To assess the impact of this vulnerability on your vendors, consider asking the following questions:

1. Have you identified any instances where unprivileged users have manipulated environment variables in your PostgreSQL deployments?
2. What measures have you implemented to prevent unauthorized access to environment variables within your PostgreSQL databases?
3. Have you applied the necessary patches or updates to address CVE-2024-10979 in your PostgreSQL installations?
4. What steps have you taken to monitor and detect potential exploitation attempts related to this vulnerability?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Affected by CVE-2024-10979

Vendors should take the following actions to mitigate the risks associated with this vulnerability:

• Upgrade PostgreSQL: Update to the latest fixed versions: 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, or 12.21.
• Restrict Environment Variable Access: Limit unprivileged users’ ability to interact with environment variables in the database.
• Implement Strong Access Controls: Enforce strict privilege management policies to minimize risks from unauthorized access.
• Monitor for Exploitation Indicators: Review logs and monitor system activity for unusual database queries or environment variable changes.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-10979?

Black Kite published the FocusTag™ for CVE-2024-10979 on November 19, 2024. TPRM professionals can utilize this FocusTag to identify vendors potentially affected by this vulnerability. Black Kite’s platform offers detailed insights, including the specific assets (IP addresses and subdomains) associated with the vulnerable versions of PostgreSQL within a vendor’s infrastructure. This information enables organizations to prioritize their risk assessments and remediation efforts effectively. By leveraging Black Kite’s intelligence, TPRM professionals can streamline their processes, reduce the scope of vendor inquiries, and focus on those most at risk, thereby enhancing the overall security posture of their supply chain.

CVE-2024-45784: Apache Airflow Vulnerability Exposes Sensitive Data in Logs

What is the Apache Airflow Vulnerability CVE-2024-45784?

CVE-2024-45784 is a high-severity vulnerability in Apache Airflow versions prior to 2.10.3, with a CVSS score of 7.5. Discovered on November 16, 2024, this flaw arises from the platform’s failure to mask sensitive configuration values in task logs. This oversight allows Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) authors to inadvertently or deliberately log sensitive information, such as API keys and database credentials. If unauthorized individuals access these logs, they could exploit the exposed data to compromise the security of the Airflow deployment. As of now, there is no evidence of active exploitation in the wild, and it has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2024-45784?

Apache Airflow is widely used for orchestrating complex workflows across various industries. A vulnerability that exposes sensitive configuration data poses significant risks, including unauthorized access to critical systems, data breaches, and potential lateral movement within an organization’s network. For Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals, this vulnerability is particularly concerning when vendors utilize Airflow in their operations, as it could lead to compromised data integrity and confidentiality.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2024-45784?

To assess the impact of this vulnerability on your vendors, consider asking the following questions:

1. Have you identified any instances where sensitive configuration variables were logged in your Airflow task logs?
2. What measures have you implemented to prevent unauthorized access to Airflow logs? Have you implemented strict access controls for logs and enabled role-based access to sensitive Airflow components as recommended to address the vulnerability?
3. Have you rotated any credentials or secrets that were potentially exposed due to this vulnerability?
4. Have you educated your Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) authors to avoid logging sensitive information in workflows, and have you rotated any credentials or secrets found in logs as part of your response to the Apache Airflow vulnerability?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Affected by CVE-2024-45784

Vendors should take the following actions to mitigate the risks associated with this vulnerability:

• Upgrade Airflow: Update to version 2.10.3 or the latest release to ensure sensitive configuration variables are masked in task logs.
• Audit Logs: Review existing task logs for any exposed secrets and update them as necessary.
• Credential Rotation: Rotate any credentials or secrets identified in logs to prevent unauthorized access.
• Access Controls: Enforce strict access controls for logs and implement role-based access for sensitive Airflow components.
• DAG Author Education: Provide guidelines and training to DAG authors to minimize the logging of sensitive information in workflows.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-45784?

Black Kite published the FocusTag™ for CVE-2024-45784 on November 18, 2024. TPRM professionals can utilize this FocusTag to identify vendors potentially affected by this vulnerability. Black Kite’s platform offers detailed insights, including the specific assets (IP addresses and subdomains) associated with the vulnerable versions of Apache Airflow within a vendor’s infrastructure. This information enables organizations to prioritize their risk assessments and remediation efforts effectively. By leveraging Black Kite’s intelligence, TPRM professionals can streamline their processes, reduce the scope of vendor inquiries, and focus on those most at risk, thereby enhancing the overall security posture of their supply chain.

Maximizing TPRM Efficiency with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ redefine how organizations approach Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) by providing actionable insights into the latest vulnerabilities, such as those affecting PAN-OS, PostgreSQL, and Apache Airflow. Here’s how these innovative tools can enhance TPRM strategies:

• Real-Time Threat Identification: FocusTags™ allow organizations to quickly pinpoint vendors impacted by critical vulnerabilities, enabling immediate action to mitigate risks.
• Strategic Risk Management: By combining vulnerability severity and vendor criticality, these tags help prioritize efforts where they are needed most.
• Enhanced Vendor Communication: FocusTags™ facilitates targeted and informed discussions with vendors, addressing their specific security challenges and exposures.
• Comprehensive Risk Visibility: Providing a panoramic view of the threat landscape, FocusTags™ enable TPRM teams to build stronger and more adaptive security ecosystems.

In an era of increasing cyber threats, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ offer an indispensable resource for managing third-party risks effectively and proactively. By transforming complex cyber threat data into clear, actionable intelligence, they empower organizations to safeguard their supply chains with confidence.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• PAN-OS: CVE-2024-0012, CVE-2024-9474, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability and Privilege Escalation Vulnerability in Palo Alto’s PAN-OS.
• PostgreSQL: CVE-2024-10979, Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability in PostgreSQL.
• Apache Airflow: CVE-2024-45784, Debug Messages Revealing Unnecessary Information in Apache Airflow.
• Atlassian Jira: CVE-2021-26086, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Atlassian Jira Server and Data Center.
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-9420, CVE-2024-47906, CVE-2024-38655, CVE-2024-38656, CVE-2024-39710, CVE-2024-11007, CVE-2024-11006, CVE-2024-11005, and CVE-2024-11004, Use-After-Free, Stack-Based Buffer Overflow, Argument Injection, and Reflected XSS Vulnerabilities in Ivanti Connect Secure.
• Nostromo nhttpd: CVE-2019-16278, Path Traversal Vulnerability, RCE Vulnerability in Nostromo nhttpd.
• LiteSpeed Cache: CVE-2024-50550, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability iin LiteSpeed Cache plugin.
• RICOH Web Image Monitor: CVE-2024-47939, Buffer Overflow Vulnerability in RICOH Web Image Monitor.
• Squid Proxy: CVE-2024-45802, DoS Vulnerability in Squid Proxy Servers.
• XLight FTP: CVE-2024-46483, Integer Overflow and RCE Vulnerabilities in XLight FTP Servers.
• Exchange Server RCE: CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-26857, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Exchange Server.
• FortiManager: CVE-2024-47575, Missing Authentication Vulnerability in FortiManager.
• Grafana: CVE-2024-9264, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability  in Grafana.
• Roundcube Webmail: CVE-2024-37383, Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail.
• Cisco FMC: CVE-2024-20424, Command Injection Vulnerability in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.
• Oracle WebLogic Server: CVE-2024-21216, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Oracle WebLogic Server.
• GitHub Enterprise: CVE-2024-9487, SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in GitHub Enterprise Server.
• Fortinet Core Products: CVE-2024-23113, Format String Vulnerability in FortiOS, FortiPAM, FortiProxy, and FortiWeb. 
• Cisco RV Routers: CVE-2024-20393, CVE-2024-20470, Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerability in RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P Dual WAN Gigabit VPN Routers. 

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-0012

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9474

https://security.paloaltonetworks.com/CVE-2024-0012

https://security.paloaltonetworks.com/CVE-2024-9474

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-10979

https://www.postgresql.org/support/security/CVE-2024-10979

https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/43040

https://lists.apache.org/thread/k2jm55jztlbmk4zrlh10syvq3n57hl4h

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-45784-apache-airflow-vulnerability-exposes-sensitive-data-in-logs/

The post Focus Friday: TPRM Insights On PAN-OS, PostgreSQL, and Apache Airflow Vulnerabilities appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s Focus Friday, where we delve into high-profile vulnerabilities impacting third-party software and explore their implications for Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM). This edition examines two notable vulnerabilities: the path traversal vulnerabilities in Atlassian Jira, Ivanti Connect Secure, and Nostromo nhttpd. With each vulnerability carrying the potential for severe exploitation, our insights aim to equip TPRM professionals with the knowledge and tools necessary to understand the impact of these risks on their organizations and address them proactively. By leveraging Black Kite’s FocusTags^TM, we enable TPRM teams to respond swiftly and strategically to evolving cyber threats, mitigating the cascading effects of third-party vulnerabilities on enterprise security.

CVE-2021-26086: Path Traversal Vulnerability in Atlassian Jira

What is the Path Traversal Vulnerability in Atlassian Jira (CVE-2021-26086)?

CVE-2021-26086 is a path traversal vulnerability in Atlassian Jira Server and Data Center versions prior to 8.5.14, between 8.6.0 and 8.13.6, and between 8.14.0 and 8.16.1. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to read specific files via a crafted request to the /WEB-INF/web.xml endpoint. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 5.3, indicating a medium severity level, and an EPSS score of 97.11%, suggesting a high likelihood of exploitation. 

PoC exploit code is available. It was first disclosed in August 2021 and has been actively exploited in the wild, with CISA adding it to their Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on November 12, 2024. The threat actor group Androxgh0st has been identified as exploiting this vulnerability.

You can access the workaround details shared on Atlassian’s official site here. However, upgrading to the latest version will help enhance your resilience against current and future vulnerabilities.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About CVE-2021-26086?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be concerned about CVE-2021-26086 because it allows unauthorized access to sensitive files on vulnerable Jira instances. If a vendor’s Jira system is compromised, attackers could gain access to internal project information, user data, and other confidential materials, potentially leading to data breaches and further exploitation within the organization’s network.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors Regarding CVE-2021-26086?

• Have you identified any instances of Atlassian Jira Server or Data Center within your infrastructure?
• If so, have these instances been updated to versions 8.5.14, 8.13.6, 8.16.1, or later to address CVE-2021-26086?
• What measures have you implemented to detect and prevent unauthorized access attempts exploiting this vulnerability?
• Can you provide details on any monitoring or logging mechanisms in place to identify potential exploitation of this vulnerability?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

• Upgrade Jira Instances: Update all Atlassian Jira Server and Data Center instances to the latest fixed versions (8.5.14, 8.13.6, 8.16.1, or later) to mitigate the vulnerability. Atlassian provides the latest versions (9.12.15) on their support site, ensuring protection against this and other known vulnerabilities.
• Implement Access Controls: Restrict access to Jira instances through secure methods such as VPNs and enforce strong authentication mechanisms.
• Apply Workarounds if Immediate Upgrade Isn’t Possible:
  • Reverse Proxy/Load Balancer Configuration: Configure reverse proxies or load balancers to block path traversal attempts by denying requests containing traversal sequences.
  • URL Rewrite Rules: Modify Jira’s urlrewrite.xml to redirect suspicious requests containing path traversal characters to safe URLs.
• Monitor Systems: Regularly review access logs and network traffic for unusual activities that may indicate exploitation attempts.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2021-26086?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for Atlassian Jira, published on November 13, 2024, enables TPRM professionals to identify vendors potentially affected by CVE-2021-26086. By providing detailed information on vulnerable assets, such as specific IP addresses and subdomains, Black Kite allows organizations to prioritize assessments and remediation efforts effectively. This targeted approach helps reduce the scope of vendor inquiries, minimizing questionnaire fatigue and streamlining the risk management process.

Critical Ivanti Connect Secure Vulnerabilities

What Are the RCE and Privilege Escalation Vulnerabilities in Ivanti Connect Secure?

After creating our FocusTag™ for Ivanti Connect Secure, specifically for CVE-2024-37404 on October 9, 2024, we mentioned this FocusTag™ in our Focus Friday post on October 11, 2024. This week, Ivanti’s Security Advisory page published an update with 25 CVEs, and 14 of these, selected based on their criticality, are discussed below. You can find the other vulnerabilities here.

The vulnerabilities identified in Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure include a total of 14 critical issues, such as use-after-free (CVE-2024-9420, CVE-2024-47906), stack-based buffer overflow (CVE-2024-47907), argument injection (CVE-2024-38655, CVE-2024-38656, CVE-2024-39710), command injection (CVE-2024-11007, CVE-2024-11006, CVE-2024-11005), and reflected XSS (CVE-2024-11004). These vulnerabilities enable attackers to escalate privileges, execute arbitrary commands, and in some cases, cause denial of service. Specifically:

• CVE-2024-9420: A use-after-free vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure versions prior to 22.7R2.3, allowing remote authenticated attackers to achieve remote code execution.
• CVE-2024-47906: Another use-after-free issue that allows local attackers to escalate privileges.
• CVE-2024-47907: A stack-based buffer overflow in the IPsec module of Ivanti Connect Secure, potentially causing a denial of service attack by unauthenticated remote attackers.
• CVE-2024-37400: An out-of-bounds read vulnerability leading to infinite loop and potential denial of service.
• CVE-2024-38655, CVE-2024-38656: Argument injection vulnerabilities that allow remote code execution with admin privileges.
• CVE-2024-39709: Incorrect file permissions, which could allow local attackers to escalate their privileges.
• CVE-2024-39710, CVE-2024-39711, CVE-2024-39712: Argument injection vulnerabilities enabling remote code execution.
• CVE-2024-11007, CVE-2024-11006, CVE-2024-11005: Command injection vulnerabilities allowing admin-level code execution.
• CVE-2024-11004: A reflected XSS vulnerability allowing privilege escalation through user interaction.

While these vulnerabilities are not yet reported to be exploited in the wild, the widespread use of Ivanti products in enterprise environments increases the potential risk. The Ivanti Connect Secure tag was updated on November 14, 2024, to reflect the latest risk assessment.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About These Vulnerabilities?

These vulnerabilities could enable unauthorized actors to access Ivanti systems, move laterally within a network, access sensitive information, or disrupt critical services. Given Ivanti Connect Secure’s role in VPN and access management, the exploitation of these vulnerabilities could lead to significant security and operational impacts for enterprises.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About These Vulnerabilities?

• Have you applied the latest patches (e.g., Ivanti Connect Secure 22.7R2.3) to mitigate these vulnerabilities?
• Can you confirm if you have implemented the recommended mitigation steps provided by Ivanti, such as restricting admin access to the management interface, strengthening password policies and MFA protections, and disabling remote access where possible?
• Have you taken measures to monitor network traffic for any unusual activities, specifically in relation to the potential exploitation of the use-after-free, stack-based buffer overflow, argument injection, command injection, and reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities identified in the Ivanti products?
• What additional precautions are in place to prevent privilege escalation or command injection attacks? Can you confirm if you have addressed the privilege escalation vulnerability (CVE-2024-39709) in Ivanti Connect Secure & Policy Secure by regularly auditing permissions, particularly for admin-level accounts?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

To mitigate these risks, vendors should:

• Upgrade to the latest versions—Ivanti Connect Secure 22.7R2.3, and Ivanti Policy Secure 22.7R1.2.
• Enable admin access only on the management interface, ensuring it is isolated from the internet by a firewall or jump-host.
• Implement strong passwords, regular password rotation, credential vaults, and multi-factor authentication (MFA) to further limit exposure.
• Regularly audit permissions, particularly for admin-level accounts, to prevent privilege escalation risks.
• For those unable to apply the update immediately, Ivanti provides mitigation steps, including restricting admin access to the management interface and strengthening password policies and MFA protections.
• Disable remote access where possible, and if remote access is essential, secure it via a VPN.
• Monitor network traffic for any unusual activities.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for These Vulnerabilities?

Black Kite’s updated FocusTag™ as of November 14, 2024, provides critical insights, including vulnerable IPs and subdomains, enabling TPRM professionals to focus on vendors directly impacted by these vulnerabilities. Black Kite’s detailed approach helps streamline the TPRM process by reducing questionnaire fatigue while enabling proactive risk management.

CVE-2019-16278 Nostromo nhttpd Path Traversal Vulnerability

What is the Nostromo nhttpd Path Traversal and Remote Code Execution Vulnerability?

CVE-2019-16278 is a critical path traversal vulnerability in the Nostromo nhttpd web server, which can enable remote code execution (RCE). Rated with a CVSS score of 9.8 and an EPSS score of 97.46%, this vulnerability exists in the http_verify function of Nostromo nhttpd versions up to 1.9.6. 

Attackers can exploit this flaw by sending a specially crafted HTTP POST request with directory traversal sequences to gain access to restricted directories and invoke commands on the target system. The vulnerability can lead to complete system compromise, allowing unauthorized code execution with root privileges, potentially stealing sensitive data, disrupting services, or deploying additional malicious software.

Discovered in 2019, this vulnerability remains actively exploited. Recently added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on November 7, 2024, this vulnerability has been observed in real-world attack campaigns.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About Nostromo nhttpd Vulnerabilities?

For TPRM professionals, vulnerabilities in the Nostromo nhttpd web server present significant third-party risks due to the severity of potential impacts. An attacker exploiting this vulnerability can execute code with high-level privileges, enabling unauthorized access to critical data, systems, and even broader network infiltration. Organizations relying on third-party vendors using Nostromo nhttpd could face exposure to breaches involving sensitive information, service interruptions, and reputational damage. This vulnerability’s presence in publicly accessible servers magnifies the risk for organizations across various sectors.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About Nostromo nhttpd Vulnerabilities?

To assess risk mitigation, TPRM professionals should ask vendors the following questions:

1. Have you upgraded Nostromo nhttpd to a version beyond 1.9.6 that addresses CVE-2019-16278? If updating Nostromo nhttpd was not feasible, have you restricted access to the web server and used application-layer firewalls to filter malicious HTTP requests as recommended in the advisory?
2. What measures are in place to restrict web server access and monitor HTTP requests for directory traversal patterns?
3. How do you regularly assess server configurations and permissions for vulnerabilities?
4. Are there any incident response procedures for detecting and responding to suspected exploits of this vulnerability?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to this Risk

Vendors using Nostromo nhttpd should consider these recommended actions:

• Upgrade to a version of Nostromo nhttpd that addresses CVE-2019-16278 to eliminate the vulnerability.
• If immediate upgrade is not feasible, implement workarounds, such as:
  • Restricting server access to trusted IP ranges.
  • Using application-layer firewalls to block malicious HTTP requests targeting directory traversal sequences.
• Implement continuous monitoring for suspicious activities related to HTTP requests containing directory traversal sequences.
• Regularly review server configurations and access permissions.
• Enable strict access controls and limit remote access to critical services.

How TPRM Professionals Can Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability

Black Kite helps TPRM professionals identify vendors affected by CVE-2019-16278 through a comprehensive FocusTag™, released on November 8, 2024. With detailed asset information, including IP addresses and subdomains, Black Kite empowers TPRM professionals to operationalize the risk, enabling early intervention. For TPRM teams, this capability enhances monitoring and response to vendor security issues, adding a valuable layer of defense against potential exploitation.

Enhancing TPRM Strategies With Black Kite’s FocusTags™

In today’s fast-paced cyber threat landscape, staying ahead of vulnerabilities is essential for a robust Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) approach. Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are designed to provide critical insights that enhance these strategies, transforming complex threat information into actionable intelligence. Here’s how these tags help TPRM professionals respond effectively to vulnerabilities like those recently highlighted in Atlassian Jira, Ivanti Connect Secure and Nostromo nhttpd:

• Real-Time Vulnerability Tracking: Black Kite’s FocusTags™ immediately identify vendors affected by emerging vulnerabilities, enabling TPRM teams to implement responses promptly and accurately.
• Strategic Risk Prioritization: FocusTags™ help prioritize risks by combining vendor criticality with vulnerability severity, allowing organizations to allocate resources to the most pressing risks.
• Enhanced Vendor Communication: By offering vendor-specific insights, FocusTags™ facilitate productive conversations with vendors about their exposure and response to particular vulnerabilities.
• Comprehensive Threat Landscape Overview: Black Kite’s FocusTags™ provide a broad view of the cybersecurity landscape, supporting the development of more resilient defenses against evolving threats.

Through Black Kite’s FocusTags™, TPRM professionals gain an invaluable tool for managing third-party cyber risks in a constantly changing environment, ensuring that vulnerabilities are managed proactively to protect enterprise security.

But having these vulnerability insights is only one step in the process. You need to work with your vendors to remediate these risks effectively and efficiently. For a comprehensive guide on transforming vendor collaboration in times of urgency, check out our latest interactive guide, Chaos to Collaboration: Transforming Third-Party Risk Response for Zero-Day Events. Learn how to streamline communication, prioritize vendor actions, and implement scalable workflows that keep your third-party risk response strong when every second counts.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• Atlassian Jira: CVE-2021-26086, Path Traversal Vulnerability in Atlassian Jira Server and Data Center.
• Ivanti Connect Secure: 
• Nostromo nhttpd: CVE-2019-16278, Path Traversal Vulnerability, RCE Vulnerability in Nostromo nhttpd.
• LiteSpeed Cache: CVE-2024-50550, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability iin LiteSpeed Cache plugin.
• RICOH Web Image Monitor: CVE-2024-47939, Buffer Overflow Vulnerability in RICOH Web Image Monitor.
• Squid Proxy: CVE-2024-45802, DoS Vulnerability in Squid Proxy Servers.
• XLight FTP: CVE-2024-46483, Integer Overflow and RCE Vulnerabilities in XLight FTP Servers.
• Exchange Server RCE: CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-26857, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Exchange Server.
• FortiManager: CVE-2024-47575, Missing Authentication Vulnerability in FortiManager.
• Grafana: CVE-2024-9264, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability  in Grafana.
• Roundcube Webmail: CVE-2024-37383, Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail.
• Cisco FMC: CVE-2024-20424, Command Injection Vulnerability in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.
• Oracle WebLogic Server: CVE-2024-21216, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Oracle WebLogic Server.
• GitHub Enterprise: CVE-2024-9487, SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in GitHub Enterprise Server.
• Fortinet Core Products: CVE-2024-23113, Format String Vulnerability in FortiOS, FortiPAM, FortiProxy, and FortiWeb. 
• Cisco RV Routers: CVE-2024-20393, CVE-2024-20470, Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerability in RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P Dual WAN Gigabit VPN Routers. 
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-37404, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure & Policy Secure.
• Zimbra: CVE-2024-45519, Remote Command Execution Vulnerability in Zimbra.
• DrayTek Routers: CVE-2020-15415, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in DrayTek Vigor Routers.
• Authentik: CVE-2024-47070, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in Authentik.
• Octopus Deploy: CVE-2024-9194, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Octopus Server.

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve-2021-26086#range-13344932

https://packetstormsecurity.com/files/164405/Atlassian-Jira-Server-Data-Center-8.4.0-File-Read.html

https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRASERVER-72695

https://confluence.atlassian.com/jirakb/workaround-for-cve-2019-15004-979416164.html

https://forums.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-Ivanti-Connect-Secure-ICS-Ivanti-Policy-Secure-IPS-Ivanti-Secure-Access-Client-ISAC-Multiple-CVEs?language=en_US

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11004

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9420

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47906

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47907

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-37400

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38655

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38656

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-39709

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-39710

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-39711

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-39712

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11007

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11006

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11005

https://blackkite.com/blog/focus-friday-insights-into-third-party-risks-in-fortinet-core-products-cisco-rv-routers-and-ivanti-connect-secure-vulnerabilities

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-16278#range-13412787

https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/47837

https://www.nazgul.ch/dev/nostromo_man.html

The post Focus Friday: Third-Party Risk Insights Into Atlassian Jira, Ivanti Connect Secure, and Nostromo nhttpd Vulnerabilities With Black Kite’s FocusTags™ appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s edition of FOCUS FRIDAY, where we delve into high-profile cybersecurity incidents from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. In this installment, we examine critical vulnerabilities affecting widely-used products such as LiteSpeed Cache, RICOH Web Image Monitor, Squid Proxy, and Xlight FTP. By leveraging Black Kite’s proprietary FocusTags™, we provide actionable insights and strategic recommendations to help organizations effectively manage and mitigate the risks associated with these vulnerabilities. Join us as we explore the details of each incident and outline best practices for enhancing your TPRM strategies.

CVE-2024-50550: LiteSpeed Cache Privilege Escalation Vulnerability

What is the LiteSpeed Cache Privilege Escalation Vulnerability (CVE-2024-50550)?

CVE-2024-50550 is a high-severity privilege escalation vulnerability identified in the LiteSpeed Cache plugin for WordPress. With a CVSS score of 8.1, this vulnerability allows unauthorized users to gain administrator-level access to affected WordPress sites. Discovered and published on November 1, 2024, the flaw resides in the is_role_simulation() function within the plugin’s Crawler feature. By exploiting inadequate hashing mechanisms, attackers can bypass security checks, enabling them to upload and activate malicious plugins, potentially leading to full site takeover. POC exploit code is not available and the vulnerability has not yet been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. The vulnerabilities can be exploited by threat actors. Once an attacker circumvents the hash check, they could gain full control over the site, leading to the installation of malware, data theft, and even disruptions to website operations.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About CVE-2024-50550?

From a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective, CVE-2024-50550 poses significant risks to organizations relying on WordPress sites that utilize the LiteSpeed Cache plugin. A successful exploitation can compromise site integrity, leading to unauthorized data access, malware distribution, and operational disruptions. Given the plugin’s widespread use—over six million active installations—TPRM professionals must assess the potential impact on their vendor ecosystems to prevent cascading security breaches.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About CVE-2024-50550?

To effectively evaluate the risk associated with CVE-2024-50550, TPRM professionals should engage vendors with the following targeted questions:

1. Have you updated all instances of LiteSpeed Cache to version 6.5.2 or later to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-50550?
2. Can you confirm if you have deactivated the Crawler feature in LiteSpeed Cache to limit potential exploit vectors related to the privilege escalation vulnerability?
3. Are you regularly monitoring server logs and website activity, specifically for unusual behavior around plugin installation and activation, to detect potential exploitation of the CVE-2024-50550 vulnerability?
4. Have you enabled virtual patching through security platforms like Patchstack until the LiteSpeed Cache plugin is updated to address the CVE-2024-50550 vulnerability?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to CVE-2024-50550

Vendors should adopt the following remediation strategies to address CVE-2024-50550 effectively:

• Upgrade the LiteSpeed Cache Plugin: Immediately update to LiteSpeed Cache version 6.5.2 or newer to patch the identified vulnerability.
• Implement Virtual Patching: Utilize security platforms like Patchstack to apply virtual patches until the plugin update is completed.
• Restrict Access: Limit access to site settings and other sensitive areas to minimize potential exploitation vectors.
• Monitor Activity: Regularly review server logs and website activities for any signs of unusual behavior, particularly related to plugin installations and activations.
• Optimize Plugin Usage: Ensure that only essential plugins are active and disable the Crawler feature if it is not required for your operations.

How TPRM Professionals Can Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-50550

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for CVE-2024-50550 was published on November 1, 2024, providing TPRM professionals with precise intelligence to identify vendors at risk. By utilizing Black Kite’s platform, organizations can efficiently filter and focus on vendors that specifically use the vulnerable LiteSpeed Cache plugin, thereby streamlining their risk assessment processes. Additionally, Black Kite offers detailed asset information, including affected IP addresses and subdomains, enabling targeted remediation efforts and reducing the overhead associated with broad-based vendor questionnaires.

CVE-2024-47939: RICOH Web Image Monitor Buffer Overflow Vulnerability

What is the RICOH Web Image Monitor Buffer Overflow Vulnerability (CVE-2024-47939)?

CVE-2024-47939 is a critical stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability identified in Ricoh’s Web Image Monitor, a component utilized in numerous Ricoh laser printers and Multi-Function Printers (MFPs). With a CVSS score of 9.8 and an EPSS score of 0.05%, this vulnerability allows attackers to execute arbitrary code remotely or cause a denial of service (DoS) by sending specially crafted HTTP requests to affected devices. Discovered and published on November 4, 2024, the flaw arises from improper handling of HTTP requests within the Web Image Monitor, enabling malicious actors to manipulate device settings, install malware, or disrupt printing services. Currently, there is no PoC exploit available, and the vulnerability has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. However, the potential for exploitation remains high given the nature of the vulnerability.

Affected Products: Ricoh’s security advisory lists specific MFP and printer models. MP 501SPF, MP 601SPF, IM 550F, IM 600F, IM 600SRF, SP 5300DN, SP 5310DN, P 800, P 801, IM 2702, MP C8003, MP C6503, IM C6500, IM C8000, IM 350F, IM 350, IM 430F, IM 430Fb, P 501, P 502, IM 2500, IM 3000, IM 3500, IM 4000, IM 5000, IM 6000, MP 2555, MP 3055, MP 3555, MP 4055, MP 5055, MP 6055, SP 8400DN, SP 6430DN, IM C530F, IM C530FB, MP 402SPF, IM C400F, IM C400SRF, IM C300F, IM C300, P C600, Aficio MP 2001, Aficio MP 2501, MP 6503, MP 7503, MP 9003, IM 7000, IM 8000, IM 9000, MP C3003, MP C3503, MP C4503, MP C5503, MP C6003, MP C2003, MP C2503, MP C3004ex, MP C3504ex, MP C2004ex, MP C2504ex, MP C4504ex, MP C5504ex, MP C6004ex, MP C3004, MP C3504, MP C2004, MP C2504, MP C4504, MP C5504, MP C6004, IM C3000, IM C3500, IM C2000, IM C2500, IM C4500, IM C5500, IM C6000, SP C842DN, SP C340DN, SP C342DN, MP C501SP, IM CW2200, IP CW2200, Aficio MP 301, SP C360SNw, SP C360SFNw, SP C361SFNw, SP C352DN, SP C360DNw, SP C435DN, SP C440DN, MP C3003, MP C3503, MP C4503, MP C5503, MP C6003, MP C2003, MP C2503, MP C6502, MP 2554, MP 3054, MP 3554, MP 4054, MP 5054, MP 6054, MP C306, MP C406, Pro 8300S, Pro 8310S, Pro 8320S, Pro 8310, Pro 8320, Pro C5200S, Pro C5210S, Pro C5300S, Pro C5310S, Pro C5300SL, Pro C7200S, Pro C7210S, Pro C7200SX, Pro C7210SX, Pro C7200SL, Pro C7200, Pro C7210, Pro C7200X, Pro C7210X, Pro C7200e, Pro C9100, Pro 9110, Pro C7100S, Pro C7110S, Pro C7100SX, Pro C7110SX, Pro C7100, Pro C7110, Pro C7100X, Pro C7110X, Pro C9200, Pro C9210.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About CVE-2024-47939?

From a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective, CVE-2024-47939 poses significant threats to organizations that rely on Ricoh printers and MFPs within their operational infrastructure. Exploitation of this vulnerability can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive documents, disruption of essential printing services, and potential pivot points for broader network compromises. Given the extensive range of affected Ricoh devices, organizations must assess the impact on their vendor ecosystems to mitigate risks associated with data breaches, operational downtime, and compromised network integrity.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About CVE-2024-47939?

To effectively evaluate the risk associated with CVE-2024-47939, TPRM professionals should engage vendors with the following targeted questions:

1. Have you updated the firmware for all affected Ricoh printers and MFPs as advised by Ricoh to mitigate the vulnerability of CVE-2024-47939?
2. Have you implemented strong network segmentation and isolated printing devices from other critical network segments to reduce the impact of a potential compromise due to CVE-2024-47939?
3. Are you monitoring network traffic to identify any unusual behavior from Ricoh devices that could indicate an exploitation of the buffer overflow vulnerability CVE-2024-47939?
4. Have you configured firewall rules to block unauthorized IPs from accessing the device and limited access to the Web Image Monitor to trusted networks only to prevent potential exploitation of CVE-2024-47939?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to CVE-2024-47939

Vendors should adopt the following remediation strategies to effectively address CVE-2024-47939:

• Update the firmware for all affected Ricoh printers and MFPs as advised by Ricoh to mitigate the vulnerability.
• Limit access to the Web Image Monitor to trusted networks only. Configure firewall rules to block unauthorized IPs from accessing the device.
• Monitor network traffic to identify any unusual behavior from Ricoh devices. Enable logging features where possible to track access and detect potential intrusions.
• Implement Strong Network Segmentation. Isolate printing devices from other critical network segments to reduce the impact of a potential compromise.

How TPRM Professionals Can Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-47939

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for CVE-2024-47939 was published on November 4, 2024, equipping TPRM professionals with actionable intelligence to identify and assess vendors utilizing vulnerable Ricoh printers and MFPs. By leveraging Black Kite’s platform, organizations can precisely filter and target vendors that operate affected Ricoh devices, thereby streamlining their risk assessment and mitigation processes. Additionally, Black Kite provides detailed asset information, including specific IP addresses and subdomains associated with the vulnerable systems, enabling targeted remediation efforts and minimizing the resources spent on broad-based vendor evaluations.

CVE-2024-45802: Squid Proxy DoS Vulnerability

What is the Squid Proxy Denial-of-Service Vulnerability (CVE-2024-45802)?

CVE-2024-45802 is a high-severity Denial-of-Service (DoS) vulnerability identified in the Squid caching proxy server when the Edge Side Includes (ESI) feature is enabled. With a CVSS score of 7.5 and an EPSS score of 0.12%, this vulnerability allows trusted servers to disrupt services by exploiting flaws in input validation, premature release of resources, and missing release of resources. Disclosed on October 30, 2024, the vulnerability affects Squid versions 3.0 through 6.9 configured with ESI, as well as Squid 6.10 and newer if ESI is manually re-enabled. There is currently no proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit available, and the vulnerability has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. Additionally, there are no indications of active exploitation campaigns or specific threat actors targeting this vulnerability.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About CVE-2024-45802?

From a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) standpoint, CVE-2024-45802 poses substantial risks to organizations that utilize Squid Proxy servers within their infrastructure. Exploitation of this vulnerability can lead to significant service disruptions, affecting all clients reliant on the Squid proxy. In environments where Squid is deployed as a reverse proxy, such disruptions can impede critical business operations, compromise the availability of web services, and potentially serve as a pivot point for further network attacks. Given the widespread use of Squid in various network architectures, TPRM professionals must evaluate the potential impact on their vendor networks to ensure continuity and maintain robust security postures.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About CVE-2024-45802?

To thoroughly assess the risk associated with CVE-2024-45802, TPRM professionals should pose the following specific inquiries to their vendors:

1. Can you confirm if you have updated all instances of Squid Proxy Server to version 6.10 or later, ensuring that the Edge Side Includes (ESI) feature is disabled by default, to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-45802?
2. Have you run the command ‘squid -v’ to verify the build parameters and confirm that ESI is disabled in your Squid Proxy Server configuration? If ‘–enable-esi’ appears, have you rebuilt Squid with ‘–disable-esi’?
3. Have you restricted proxy server access to trusted networks only to reduce exposure to potential exploitation sources, as recommended in the advisory for CVE-2024-45802?
4. Are you monitoring network traffic for unusual or sustained requests, which may indicate attempted exploitation of the DoS vulnerability in Squid Proxy Server?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to CVE-2024-45802

Vendors should implement the following remediation measures to effectively mitigate the risks posed by CVE-2024-45802:

• Upgrade Squid Proxy: Immediately update all Squid Proxy servers to version 6.10 or newer, ensuring that the ESI feature is disabled by default to eliminate the vulnerability.
• Verify Configuration: Execute squid -v to confirm that the –disable-esi flag is present in your Squid Proxy build parameters. If the –enable-esi option is enabled, rebuild Squid with the –disable-esi configuration.
• Implement Network Monitoring: Continuously monitor network traffic for any unusual or sustained request patterns that may suggest attempts to exploit the DoS vulnerability.
• Restrict Access: Limit access to Squid Proxy servers by configuring firewall rules to allow connections only from trusted networks and authorized IP addresses.
• Temporary Mitigation: For environments where immediate upgrading is not feasible, rebuild Squid Proxy with the –disable-esi flag as a temporary measure to prevent exploitation.

How TPRM Professionals Can Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-45802

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for CVE-2024-45802 was published on October 30, 2024, providing TPRM professionals with precise intelligence to identify vendors utilizing vulnerable Squid Proxy servers. By leveraging Black Kite’s platform, organizations can efficiently filter and concentrate on vendors that operate affected Squid Proxy versions, streamlining their risk assessment and mitigation processes. Additionally, Black Kite offers detailed asset information, including specific IP addresses and subdomains associated with the vulnerable systems, enabling targeted remediation efforts and reducing the resources required for broad-based vendor evaluations.

CVE-2024-46483: Xlight FTP Critical Vulnerability

What is the Xlight FTP Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (CVE-2024-46483)?

CVE-2024-46483 is a critical heap overflow vulnerability identified in Xlight SFTP Server, a widely-used FTP and SFTP solution for Windows. With a CVSS score of 9.8, this vulnerability allows unauthenticated attackers to execute remote code or initiate denial-of-service (DoS) attacks. Disclosed on October 31, 2024, the flaw originates from inadequate validation in the SFTP protocol’s packet parsing, specifically in handling client-sent strings. By manipulating a four-byte string length prefix, attackers can craft malicious packets that trigger out-of-bounds memory operations, potentially leading to complete system compromise. While PoC exploit code is publicly available on GitHub, the vulnerability has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, and there are no current reports of active exploitation by threat actors.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About CVE-2024-46483?

From a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective, CVE-2024-46483 poses significant threats to organizations utilizing Xlight SFTP Server for secure file transfers. Exploitation of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized system access, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary commands, install malware, or disrupt critical services through DoS attacks. Given the widespread deployment of Xlight SFTP Server in various industries, including finance, healthcare, and technology, the potential impact on vendor ecosystems is substantial. TPRM professionals must assess the presence of vulnerable Xlight instances within their supply chains to prevent cascading security breaches and ensure the integrity of sensitive data exchanges.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About CVE-2024-46483?

To effectively evaluate the risk associated with CVE-2024-46483, TPRM professionals should engage vendors with the following targeted questions:

1. Have you updated all instances of Xlight SFTP Server to the latest version that patches CVE-2024-46483, specifically versions 3.9.4.2 and earlier?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented firewall rules to restrict access to the SFTP server and are actively monitoring for unexpected traffic as recommended?
3. Are you limiting network access to the SFTP server to trusted IPs only as a measure to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-46483?
4. Given the public availability of PoC exploit code for CVE-2024-46483 on GitHub, what specific measures have you taken to monitor and detect potential exploitation attempts on your Xlight SFTP Server?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to CVE-2024-46483

Vendors should implement the following remediation measures to effectively mitigate the risks posed by CVE-2024-46483:

• Update Xlight SFTP Server: Immediately upgrade to the latest version of Xlight SFTP Server, which patches CVE-2024-46483, to eliminate the vulnerability.
• Restrict Network Access: Limit access to the SFTP server by configuring firewall rules to allow connections only from trusted IP addresses, thereby reducing exposure to potential attackers.
• Monitor Network Traffic: Continuously monitor network traffic for any abnormal patterns or sustained requests that may indicate attempted exploitation of the vulnerability.
• Implement Strong Authentication: Enhance security by enforcing robust authentication mechanisms, such as multi-factor authentication (MFA), to prevent unauthorized access.
• Regular Security Audits: Conduct regular security assessments and vulnerability scans to ensure that all systems are up-to-date and free from exploitable vulnerabilities.

How TPRM Professionals Can Leverage Black Kite for CVE-2024-46483

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for CVE-2024-46483 was published on October 31, 2024, providing TPRM professionals with actionable intelligence to identify vendors utilizing vulnerable Xlight SFTP Server instances. By leveraging Black Kite’s platform, organizations can efficiently filter and target vendors that operate affected Xlight versions, streamlining their risk assessment and mitigation processes. Additionally, Black Kite offers comprehensive asset information, including specific IP addresses and subdomains associated with the vulnerable systems, enabling targeted remediation efforts and minimizing the resources required for broad-based vendor evaluations.

Elevating TPRM Strategies with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are instrumental in enhancing Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) approaches, particularly when addressing vulnerabilities in widely-deployed systems like LiteSpeed Cache, RICOH Web Image Monitor, Squid Proxy, and Xlight FTP. These tags provide:

• Real-Time Vulnerability Tracking: Instantly identifying vendors affected by the latest vulnerabilities enables rapid and strategic responses.
• Risk Prioritization: By evaluating both the criticality of vendors and the severity of vulnerabilities, FocusTags™ assists in allocating resources more effectively.
• Informed Vendor Engagement: Facilitate targeted discussions with vendors, focusing on their specific security postures in relation to the identified vulnerabilities.
• Comprehensive Security Overview: With a broad view of the threat landscape, these tags aid in enhancing overall cybersecurity strategies.

Black Kite’s FocusTags™, tailored to the complexities of vulnerabilities in diverse systems, offer a streamlined, intelligent approach to TPRM. By converting intricate cyber threat data into actionable intelligence, these tags are critical for managing risks efficiently and proactively in an environment where cyber threats are constantly evolving.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• LiteSpeed Cache: CVE-2024-50550, Privilege Escalation Vulnerability iin LiteSpeed Cache plugin.
• RICOH Web Image Monitor: CVE-2024-47939, Buffer Overflow Vulnerability in RICOH Web Image Monitor.
• Squid Proxy: CVE-2024-45802, DoS Vulnerability in Squid Proxy Servers.
• XLight FTP: CVE-2024-46483, Integer Overflow and RCE Vulnerabilities in XLight FTP Servers.
• Exchange Server RCE: CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-26857, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Exchange Server.
• FortiManager: CVE-2024-47575, Missing Authentication Vulnerability in FortiManager.
• Grafana: CVE-2024-9264, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability  in Grafana.
• Roundcube Webmail: CVE-2024-37383, Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail.
• Cisco FMC: CVE-2024-20424, Command Injection Vulnerability in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.
• Oracle WebLogic Server: CVE-2024-21216, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Oracle WebLogic Server.
• GitHub Enterprise: CVE-2024-9487, SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in GitHub Enterprise Server.
• Fortinet Core Products: CVE-2024-23113, Format String Vulnerability in FortiOS, FortiPAM, FortiProxy, and FortiWeb. 
• Cisco RV Routers: CVE-2024-20393, CVE-2024-20470, Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerability in RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P Dual WAN Gigabit VPN Routers. 
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-37404, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure & Policy Secure.
• Zimbra: CVE-2024-45519, Remote Command Execution Vulnerability in Zimbra.
• DrayTek Routers: CVE-2020-15415, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in DrayTek Vigor Routers.
• Authentik: CVE-2024-47070, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in Authentik.
• Octopus Deploy: CVE-2024-9194, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Octopus Server.
• pgAdmin: CVE-2024-9014, OAuth2 Authentication Vulnerability in pgAdmin.
• Keycloak: CVE-2024-8698, CVE-2024-8883, SAML Signature Validation Bypass and Session Hijacking Vulnerability in Keycloak.
• Navidrome: CVE-2024-47062, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Navidrome.

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-50550

https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/litespeed-cache/wordpress-litespeed-cache-plugin-6-5-1-privilege-escalation-vulnerability?_s_id=cve

https://securityonline.info/over-6-million-sites-at-risk-severe-privilege-escalation-flaw-cve-2024-50550-in-litespeed-cache-plugin

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47939

https://www.ricoh.com/products/security/vulnerabilities/vul?id=ricoh-2024-000011

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-45802

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/security/advisories/GHSA-f975-v7qw-q7hj

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-46483

https://github.com/kn32/cve-2024-46483

https://www.xlightftpd.com/whatsnew.htm

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: TPRM INSIGHTS ON LITESPEED CACHE, RICOH WEB IMAGE MONITOR, SQUID PROXY, AND XLIGHT FTP VULNERABILITIES WITH BLACK KITE’S FOCUSTAGS™ appeared first on Black Kite.

Written by: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s edition of Focus Friday, where we explore high-profile cybersecurity incidents and vulnerabilities through the lens of Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM). In today’s rapidly evolving threat landscape, critical vulnerabilities pose a significant risk to organizations relying on third-party software and services. This week, we dive into several crucial vulnerabilities, including those affecting Exchange Server, FortiManager, Grafana, Roundcube Webmail, and Cisco FMC each with potentially severe impacts on businesses. By leveraging Black Kite’s FocusTags™, TPRM professionals can gain key insights and stay ahead of these evolving threats.

Critical Microsoft Exchange Server RCE Vulnerabilities

What are the Microsoft Exchange Server RCE Vulnerabilities?

The vulnerabilities impacting Microsoft Exchange Server, particularly CVE-2021-26855, are critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) issues. CVE-2021-26855 is a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to send arbitrary HTTP requests and execute code on the target Exchange Server. Other vulnerabilities like CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, and CVE-2021-26857 enable the attacker to install malicious programs and exfiltrate data. These vulnerabilities have a high EPSS score, with CVE-2021-26855 scoring 97.5%, indicating a significant likelihood of exploitation in the wild.

First discovered in early 2021, these vulnerabilities were rapidly exploited by various threat actors, including the Chinese-based group Salt Typhoon, targeting critical infrastructure. Exploits have allowed attackers to plant backdoors, steal sensitive data, and compromise systems. Microsoft and several security agencies, including CISA, have released advisories and urged immediate patching. CVE-2021-34473 and CVE-2021-31196 were added to CISA’s KEV catalog on August 21, 2024. 

The vulnerability was reported in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) on October 11, 2024, and the details were later shared on the Chertoff Group website on October 18, 2024. Among the four CVEs we discussed (CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-26857), we included these in the FocusTag scope, which was tagged earlier this week by Black Kite’s Research & Intelligence Team (BRITE). Clients tagged under this FocusTag, who had previously taken precautions against CVE-2021-31196 and CVE-2021-34473, were protected from these four vulnerabilities as well. In addition to the above-mentioned group of four CVEs that were discussed in recent blogs, it is crucial for security personnel in organizations to remain vigilant regarding CVE-2021-31196 and CVE-2021-34473. We had previously mentioned CVE-2021-31196 and CVE-2021-34473 vulnerabilities in our August 23, 2024 Focus Friday post.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned?

From a third-party risk management perspective, these vulnerabilities pose significant risks to organizations that rely on Microsoft Exchange Server for communication and operational functions. A successful attack on Exchange Servers can lead to full system compromise, allowing attackers to access sensitive emails, contacts, and other communications. Additionally, the compromised server can be leveraged for further attacks, potentially spreading malware or stealing additional data from third-party vendors. Given the widespread use of Exchange Servers in enterprise environments, the ripple effects of such a breach can be substantial, especially when considering the possibility of fraudulent emails being sent from compromised accounts.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About These Vulnerabilities?

1. Have you applied the latest security updates to all affected versions of Exchange Server (2019 CU1 to CU8, 2016 CU8 to CU19, 2013 CU22, CU23, SP1, and 2010 SP3) to mitigate the risk of CVE-2021-31196, CVE-2021-34473, CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, and CVE-2021-26857?
2. 2. Can you confirm if you have implemented strong security practices, including limiting access to the server, enabling multi-factor authentication, and regularly auditing access logs, to prevent potential exploitation of the Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerabilities in Microsoft Exchange Server?
3. 3. Are you actively monitoring network traffic to and from Exchange Server for any unusual activity that may indicate exploitation attempts related to CVE-2021-31196, CVE-2021-34473, CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, and CVE-2021-26857?
4. 4. Given the critical nature of Exchange Server, have you undertaken proactive threat hunting to identify potential indicators of compromise related to the aforementioned CVEs?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

• Apply the Latest Security Updates. Microsoft has released security updates to address this vulnerability. Ensure that all affected Exchange Server installations are updated to the latest cumulative updates as listed above.
• Organizations are advised to prioritize patch management, strengthen authentication measures, and collaborate with ISPs to mitigate these evolving risks.
• Implement Strong Security Practices. Ensure that Exchange Server is properly configured with strong security settings, including limiting access to the server, enabling multi-factor authentication, and regularly auditing access logs.
• Consider Proactive Threat Hunting. Given the critical nature of Exchange Server, proactive threat hunting to identify potential indicators of compromise may be warranted.
• Monitor Network Traffic. Regularly monitor network traffic to and from Exchange Server for any unusual activity that may indicate exploitation attempts.

How TPRM Professionals Can Leverage Black Kite for These Vulnerabilities

Black Kite provides a streamlined approach for identifying vendors at risk of these vulnerabilities. The Exchange Server RCE FocusTag enables TPRM professionals to pinpoint vendors who have vulnerable Microsoft Exchange Servers in their environment. Black Kite helps operationalize this information by providing detailed asset intelligence, including IP addresses and subdomains, linked to the vendors. With this level of insight, TPRM teams can prioritize outreach and remediation efforts, ensuring that only vendors with exposure to these vulnerabilities are addressed. Black Kite first published this tag in August 2024 and most recently updated it on October 23, 2024, with new threat intelligence related to Chinese state-sponsored threat actors.

FortiManager: CVE-2024-47575 Missing Authentication Vulnerability

What is the FortiManager CVE-2024-47575 Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-47575 is a critical missing authentication vulnerability that affects FortiManager, a system used to manage Fortinet’s network security devices. This vulnerability, assigned a CVSS score of 9.8 and an EPSS score of 0.04%, was first identified in the wild on June 27, 2024. It allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code or commands by exploiting the FortiManager fgfmd daemon via specially crafted requests. Both on-premise and cloud versions of FortiManager are impacted, making this vulnerability a significant threat. On October 23, 2024, this vulnerability was added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.

The vulnerability is actively exploited by the UNC5820 threat group, which has used it to steal configuration files, IP addresses, and credentials from FortiGate devices managed by FortiManager systems. This flaw poses a severe risk to organizations using FortiManager as it allows attackers to automate the exfiltration of sensitive information and potentially compromise their entire security infrastructure.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned About the FortiManager Vulnerability?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should be concerned because FortiManager is a critical tool for managing and securing network infrastructure. If compromised, attackers can gain access to sensitive configuration files and credentials for FortiGate devices, potentially leading to wider network breaches and unauthorized control of key network devices. The exposure of configuration details can lead to attackers disabling security defenses or manipulating device settings to bypass security measures. Additionally, the exploitation of this vulnerability could facilitate future attacks by providing attackers with the necessary information to escalate privileges or conduct lateral movements within the network.

As FortiManager is widely used by organizations to manage network security, the impact of this vulnerability could be devastating, particularly if sensitive information is exfiltrated and used to compromise other critical systems.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the FortiManager Vulnerability?

When assessing vendor exposure to CVE-2024-47575, TPRM professionals should ask:

1. Has the vendor applied the latest firmware updates that address CVE-2024-47575?
2. Are unregistered devices being blocked from connecting to the FortiManager system using the fgfm-deny-unknown configuration?
3. Have all FortiGate device credentials been updated following the discovery of this vulnerability?
4. Is the vendor actively monitoring FortiManager event logs for any suspicious activities, especially from unregistered devices like “localhost”?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors subject to this risk

To mitigate the risks associated with CVE-2024-47575, vendors should:

• Apply firmware updates immediately. Ensure all FortiManager installations are updated to the latest secure versions (7.6.1, 7.4.5, 7.2.8, 7.0.13, 6.4.15, or above).
• Restrict device registrations by enabling fgfm-deny-unknown, which prevents unregistered devices from attempting to connect to FortiManager.
• Implement IP restrictions to limit access only to trusted FortiGate devices through the config system local-in-policy.
• Review FortiManager logs regularly for indicators of compromise (IoCs), including connections from unregistered devices or malicious IP addresses.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite published the FocusTag™ on October 23, 2024, identifying CVE-2024-47575 as a significant threat due to its active exploitation in the wild. TPRM professionals can operationalize this tag by using Black Kite’s insights to determine which of their vendors may be exposed to this vulnerability. Black Kite provides asset information such as IP addresses and subdomains that may be at risk, allowing organizations to pinpoint which vendors may need to implement remediation steps. This vulnerability was last updated in the tag with information about ongoing threat activity by the UNC5820 group, ensuring TPRM professionals stay informed as new details emerge.

CVE-2024-9264 and Grafana RCE Vulnerability

What is the Grafana RCE Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-9264 is a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability affecting Grafana, a popular open-source platform used for monitoring and observability. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.9, making it extremely severe, indicating lower immediate exploitation potential. First disclosed in October 2024, this vulnerability is linked to an experimental feature, SQL Expressions, which was enabled by default due to improper implementation of feature flags. Attackers can inject system commands through improperly sanitized SQL queries, which could lead to full system compromise if exploited successfully.

While the vulnerability has not yet been observed in widespread exploitation, the presence of the PoC raises concerns about the likelihood of future attacks. The exploitation depends on whether the DuckDB binary is present on the Grafana server. If DuckDB is manually installed, attackers could read sensitive files like “/etc/passwd” or retrieve environment variables, making the impact devastating. As of now, this vulnerability has not been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned?

From a TPRM perspective, CVE-2024-9264 presents serious risks to organizations using Grafana. Since Grafana is commonly deployed to monitor critical infrastructure, any compromise could lead to the exposure of sensitive data, such as operational logs or system configurations. Moreover, if an attacker gains control of the Grafana instance, they can potentially pivot to other parts of the network, launching further attacks. Given that any user with Viewer permissions can exploit this vulnerability, organizations using Grafana may unknowingly expose themselves to insider threats or unauthorized access by users with minimal privileges.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the Grafana RCE Vulnerability?

1. Have you upgraded your Grafana instances to one of the patched versions (v11.0.5+security-01, v11.1.6+security-01, v11.2.1+security-01, v11.0.6+security-01, v11.1.7+security-01, v11.2.2+security-01) to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-9264?
2. Can you confirm if the DuckDB binary has been removed from the system’s PATH or uninstalled entirely to prevent exploitation of the CVE-2024-9264 vulnerability?
3. Have you implemented measures to regularly review system logs for suspicious activity, specifically related to potential exploitation of the SQL Expressions feature in Grafana?
4. Can you confirm if you have implemented proper access controls for users with Viewer permissions or higher to prevent unauthorized exploitation of the SQL Expressions feature in Grafana?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

• Immediately upgrade Grafana to a patched version, such as v11.0.5+security-01, v11.1.6+security-01, or the latest v11.2.2+security-01, to prevent exploitation.
• If a patch cannot be applied right away, remove or uninstall the DuckDB binary from the system to mitigate the risk.
• Regularly audit system logs and monitor access control for any unusual activity involving Grafana users with Viewer permissions or higher.
• Follow Grafana Labs’ security announcements for any additional updates or mitigations related to this vulnerability.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite helps TPRM professionals determine which vendors are vulnerable to this critical Grafana RCE vulnerability. The FocusTag™ for Grafana enables users to identify vendors who are potentially exposed by flagging related assets, including IP addresses and subdomains. With this actionable intelligence, TPRM teams can prioritize communications with affected vendors, ensuring timely remediation efforts. This tag was published by Black Kite in October 18, 2024, and ongoing updates are provided as new information becomes available.

CVE-2024-37383 and Roundcube Webmail XSS Vulnerability

What is the Roundcube Webmail XSS Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-37383 is a medium-severity Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability impacting Roundcube Webmail. This vulnerability, with a CVSS score of 6.1 and an EPSS score of 0.05%, allows attackers to inject and execute arbitrary JavaScript code within the victim’s web browser. Discovered in October 2024, the flaw was exploited by unknown threat actors to steal user credentials by embedding malicious SVG animate attributes in emails. Once the victim opened the email, the embedded script exfiltrated login credentials to an external server. It’s currently not clear who is behind the exploitation activity, although prior flaws discovered in Roundcube have been abused by multiple hacking groups such as APT28, Winter Vivern, and TAG-70. After we tagged it, it was published in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on October 24, 2024.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned?

From a TPRM perspective, this XSS vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail poses a significant risk to organizations that rely on this platform for email services. Exploitation of this vulnerability can lead to credential theft, allowing attackers to gain unauthorized access to sensitive accounts, potentially compromising email communications and exposing confidential information. Furthermore, the ability to execute malicious code via emails makes it a potent vector for phishing attacks, putting both vendors and their partners at risk. Email remains a critical component of most business operations, and any breach in this system can have far-reaching consequences, including reputational damage and regulatory scrutiny.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the Roundcube Webmail XSS Vulnerability?

1. Have you updated your Roundcube Webmail instances to the patched versions (1.5.7 or 1.6.7) that address CVE-2024-37383?
2. What measures have you implemented to detect and mitigate phishing attacks targeting email clients like Roundcube?
3. Can you confirm if you have implemented email filtering tools to block malicious attachments and scripts within emails as recommended in the advisory?
4. Have you enabled multi-factor authentication (MFA) on all critical systems to mitigate credential theft risks associated with this vulnerability?
5. Have you reviewed your email logs for any suspicious login activities or interactions with known malicious domains, such as ‘libcdn[.]org’?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

• Upgrade Roundcube Webmail to versions 1.5.7 or 1.6.7 to patch the XSS vulnerability and mitigate the risk of credential theft.
• Educate employees on how to identify and avoid phishing emails, with an emphasis on recognizing suspicious attachments or links.
• Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) across all critical systems to reduce the likelihood of unauthorized access through stolen credentials.
• Conduct a thorough audit of Roundcube logs for any indicators of compromise (IoCs) related to this vulnerability or phishing attacks.
• Use email filtering tools to block potentially malicious content, such as scripts or SVG files, embedded within emails.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for Roundcube Webmail enables TPRM professionals to identify vendors using vulnerable versions of Roundcube. By providing detailed asset information, including IP addresses and subdomains associated with vendors, Black Kite allows TPRM teams to target remediation efforts where they are most needed. This FocusTag was published on October 24, 2024, and ongoing updates are available to ensure that TPRM professionals stay informed about the latest exploitation trends and mitigations related to this vulnerability.

CVE-2024-20424 and Cisco FMC Command Injection Vulnerability

What is the Cisco FMC Command Injection Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-20424 is a critical command injection vulnerability in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center (FMC) Software, with a CVSS score of 9.9. This vulnerability arises from insufficient input validation in the web-based management interface of the software. Exploiting this flaw allows authenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges, potentially compromising the entire system. The vulnerability was first disclosed in October 2024, and although no active exploitation has been reported yet, the critical nature of this flaw makes it a priority for patching.

Attackers could exploit this vulnerability using credentials from a low-privileged account, such as a Security Analyst (Read Only), to escalate privileges and run high-level commands. This could result in unauthorized modifications, malware installation, or disabling critical security defenses. While there is no PoC available yet, the risk posed by this vulnerability is significant, particularly for organizations heavily relying on Cisco FMC software for managing their firewalls.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Be Concerned?

For third-party risk management (TPRM) professionals, this vulnerability presents a significant risk to organizations using Cisco FMC software. Compromising this system would allow attackers to control network security policies, firewall settings, and other critical functions, leading to potential unauthorized access across the network. Cisco FMC is often used to manage firewalls, and any disruption or control takeover could result in network breaches, exposure of sensitive data, and operational disruption. The criticality of CVE-2024-20424 makes it essential for TPRM professionals to ensure that their vendors and partners using Cisco FMC have properly mitigated this vulnerability.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the Cisco FMC Command Injection Vulnerability?

• Have you applied Cisco’s latest software updates that address CVE-2024-20424 and CVE-2024-20379 in Cisco FMC?
• Can you confirm if you have restricted access to the web-based management interface of Cisco FMC Software to trusted users only, as a measure to prevent potential exploitation of CVE-2024-20424 and CVE-2024-20379?
• Have you implemented multi-factor authentication (MFA) for user accounts, especially for low-level user accounts such as Security Analyst (Read Only), to prevent privilege escalation and execution of highly privileged commands as a result of CVE-2024-20424?
• Are you monitoring network activity for unusual behavior indicative of potential exploitation of the command injection vulnerability (CVE-2024-20424) and the improper input validation vulnerability (CVE-2024-20379) in Cisco FMC Software?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors

• Immediately apply the latest software patches released by Cisco to address CVE-2024-20424 and CVE-2024-20379.
• Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all users accessing Cisco FMC to mitigate unauthorized access risks.
• Restrict access to the Cisco FMC web-based management interface to trusted IP addresses and users only.
• Regularly monitor network traffic and logs for any suspicious activity or indicators of compromise.
• Follow Cisco’s official advisory for further instructions and guidance on securing Cisco FMC software.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite’s FocusTag™ for Cisco FMC provides a comprehensive view of which vendors are potentially exposed to these vulnerabilities. This tag allows TPRM professionals to pinpoint which of their third-party vendors or partners are using vulnerable Cisco FMC versions. By leveraging Black Kite’s asset intelligence, such as associated IP addresses and subdomains, TPRM teams can focus their remediation efforts on the vendors that pose the highest risk. Black Kite published this FocusTag on October 24, 2024, and it will be updated as new details or patches are released by Cisco.

Maximizing TPRM Effectiveness with Black Kite’s FocusTags™

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are vital tools for enhancing Third-Party Risk Management strategies, offering targeted insights that help organizations mitigate risks more efficiently. These tags, especially when dealing with vulnerabilities in Exchange Server, FortiManager, Grafana, Roundcube Webmail, and Cisco FMC, provide:

• Real-Time Risk Identification: Immediate recognition of vendors impacted by critical vulnerabilities, facilitating prompt and decisive action.
• Risk Prioritization: By assessing vendor importance and vulnerability severity, TPRM professionals can focus on the most critical issues first, ensuring resources are used effectively.
• Informed Vendor Engagement: Black Kite’s FocusTags™ empower organizations to hold informed, meaningful conversations with vendors about their security posture and remediation efforts, specifically addressing exposure to identified vulnerabilities.
• Strengthened Cybersecurity Posture: These tags offer a comprehensive overview of the threat landscape, enabling organizations to enhance their overall cybersecurity strategies, improving their resilience against future threats.

By transforming complex threat data into actionable intelligence, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ streamline the risk management process, enabling TPRM professionals to respond swiftly to emerging vulnerabilities and ensure the safety of their third-party ecosystem.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• Exchange Server RCE: CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-27065, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-26857, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Exchange Server.
• FortiManager: CVE-2024-47575, Missing Authentication Vulnerability in FortiManager.
• Grafana: CVE-2024-9264, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability  in Grafana.
• Roundcube Webmail: CVE-2024-37383, Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail.
• Cisco FMC: CVE-2024-20424, Command Injection Vulnerability in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.
• Oracle WebLogic Server: CVE-2024-21216, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Oracle WebLogic Server.
• GitHub Enterprise: CVE-2024-9487, SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in GitHub Enterprise Server.
• Fortinet Core Products: CVE-2024-23113, Format String Vulnerability in FortiOS, FortiPAM, FortiProxy, and FortiWeb. 
• Cisco RV Routers: CVE-2024-20393, CVE-2024-20470, Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerability in RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P Dual WAN Gigabit VPN Routers. 
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-37404, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure & Policy Secure.
• Zimbra: CVE-2024-45519, Remote Command Execution Vulnerability in Zimbra.
• DrayTek Routers: CVE-2020-15415, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in DrayTek Vigor Routers.
• Authentik: CVE-2024-47070, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in Authentik.
• Octopus Deploy: CVE-2024-9194, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Octopus Server.
• pgAdmin: CVE-2024-9014, OAuth2 Authentication Vulnerability in pgAdmin.
• Keycloak: CVE-2024-8698, CVE-2024-8883, SAML Signature Validation Bypass and Session Hijacking Vulnerability in Keycloak.
• Navidrome: CVE-2024-47062, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Navidrome.
• PAN-OS Cleartext: CVE-2024-8687, Cleartext Exposure Security Flaw in PAN-OS, GlobalProtect, Prisma Access.
• FileCatalyst Workflow: CVE-2024-6633, CVE-2024-6632, Insecure Default Configuration and SQL Injection Vulnerability in Fortra FileCatalyst Workflow.
• WPML: CVE-2024-6386, Critical Remote Code Execution Vulnerability via Twig Server-Side Template Injection in WPML Plugin
• SonicWall Firewalls: CVE-2024-40766, Critical Improper Access Control Vulnerability in SonicWall Firewalls

References

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/u-s-officials-race-to-understand-severity-of-chinas-salt-typhoon-hacks-6e7c3951

https://chertoffgroup.com/china-based-cyber-attacks-highlight-us-tech-vulnerability

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-26855

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-27065

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-26858

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-26857

https://blackkite.com/blog/focus-friday-tprm-insights-into-critical-vulnerabilities-in-microsoft-windows-solarwinds-whd-zimbra-and-exchange-server

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47575

https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-423

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/fortinet-warns-of-new-critical-fortimanager-flaw-used-in-zero-day-attacks

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9264

https://github.com/nollium/CVE-2024-9264/tree/main

https://grafana.com/blog/2024/10/17/grafana-security-release-critical-severity-fix-for-cve-2024-9264

https://grafana.com/security/security-advisories/cve-2024-9264

https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-q99m-qcv4-fpm7

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-37383

https://thehackernews.com/2024/10/hackers-exploit-roundcube-webmail-xss.html

https://github.com/roundcube/roundcubemail/releases/tag/1.6.7

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-20424

https://sec.cloudapps.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-fmc-cmd-inj-v3AWDqN7

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-20424-cvss-9-9-cisco-fmc-software-vulnerability-grants-attackers-root-access

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: ADDRESSING EXCHANGE SERVER RCE, FORTIMANAGER, GRAFANA, ROUNDCUBE WEBMAIL, AND CISCO FMC VULNERABILITIES FROM A TPRM PERSPECTIVE appeared first on Black Kite.

Written By: Ferdi Gül

This week’s Focus Friday blog highlights two critical vulnerabilities that pose significant risks to third-party ecosystems—CVE-2024-21216 affecting Oracle WebLogic Server and CVE-2024-9487 impacting GitHub Enterprise. These vulnerabilities, involving remote code execution and authentication bypass, respectively, threaten not only the organizations directly utilizing these products but also their entire supply chains. In this blog, we will dive into each vulnerability, its potential impact, and why Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) professionals should pay close attention. We also explore how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ can streamline your risk assessment process by identifying vendors impacted by these threats and providing actionable insights for mitigation.

CVE-2024-21216: Oracle WebLogic Server RCE Vulnerability

What is the Oracle WebLogic Server RCE Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-21216 is a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in Oracle WebLogic Server, affecting versions 12.2.1.4.0 and 14.1.1.0.0. This vulnerability allows attackers with network access via T3 or IIOP protocol to gain full control over the server without requiring authentication. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized data access, system manipulation, and further malicious activities like ransomware deployment. The vulnerability was first published on Oracle’s October 2024 CPU and holds a CVSS score of 9.8, signifying its severity. Although no known exploitation has been reported in the wild, a PoC is not yet available. Historically, similar vulnerabilities have been exploited by Chinese threat actors.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About Oracle WebLogic Server RCE Vulnerability?

Oracle WebLogic Server is a widely used platform for hosting business-critical applications. A successful attack could result in complete system compromise, exposing sensitive data or enabling malicious control of the organization’s operations. This vulnerability is particularly dangerous for organizations hosting externally-facing instances of WebLogic, as it could expose them to external threats. In the context of third-party risk management, any vendors or partners using Oracle WebLogic Server should be thoroughly assessed for potential exposure, especially if these servers host sensitive applications or data.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about CVE-2024-21216?

• Have you identified any instances of Oracle WebLogic Server versions 12.2.1.4.0 or 14.1.1.0.0 in your infrastructure?
• Have you applied the security patches released by Oracle in October 2024 for the affected WebLogic Server versions?
• Are the T3 and IIOP protocols disabled if they are not necessary for your environment?
• What security controls, such as MFA and access restrictions, are in place to protect administrative access to your WebLogic servers?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

• Immediately apply Oracle’s latest security patches for WebLogic Server versions 12.2.1.4.0 and 14.1.1.0.0.
• Disable or restrict access to T3 and IIOP protocols unless necessary for business operations.
• Implement strong access controls, including multi-factor authentication, for any WebLogic administrative interfaces.
• Limit external access to WebLogic servers by configuring firewalls or restricting IPs to trusted sources only.
• Regularly monitor network traffic for any suspicious activity targeting WebLogic servers.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite published the Oracle WebLogic Server FocusTag on October 16, 2024, offering detailed insights into which vendors are at risk of this critical vulnerability. TPRM professionals can operationalize this FocusTag by identifying vendors using vulnerable WebLogic versions and prioritizing assessments and remediation efforts. The FocusTag also provides IP addresses and subdomains hosting the vulnerable systems, empowering organizations to act swiftly and mitigate risk efficiently. Monitoring vendors with exposure to this vulnerability through Black Kite’s intelligence platform can significantly reduce response time and mitigate potential exploitation risks.

CVE-2024-9487: GitHub Enterprise SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability

What is the GitHub Enterprise SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-9487 is a critical vulnerability that affects GitHub Enterprise Server versions prior to 3.15. This vulnerability allows attackers to bypass SAML Single Sign-On (SSO) authentication, potentially granting unauthorized access to sensitive GitHub Enterprise Server instances. The issue stems from improper verification of cryptographic signatures during the SAML authentication process, which may allow attackers to bypass authentication and gain unauthorized access. This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.5, indicating its critical severity, and an EPSS score of 0.05%. While no known public exploitation has been reported, it poses a significant risk to enterprises that utilize GitHub Enterprise Server with SAML SSO and encrypted assertions.

The vulnerability was disclosed in October 2024 and has not yet been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. However, given the critical nature of the vulnerability and its potential impact on organizations, it should be addressed immediately by applying the recommended patches.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About the GitHub Enterprise Vulnerability?

GitHub Enterprise is widely used by organizations to manage their development environments and host proprietary code. A successful exploitation of CVE-2024-9487 could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive repositories, potentially exposing intellectual property, sensitive data, or security credentials. For TPRM professionals, the exposure of a third-party development platform like GitHub could have a cascading impact on software supply chains, making it critical to assess whether any vendors or partners are at risk due to this vulnerability.

Organizations with vendors relying on GitHub Enterprise must act swiftly to ensure that these systems are secure, as a breach could lead to unauthorized changes in code, further introducing vulnerabilities into the products and services downstream.

What questions should TPRM professionals ask vendors about CVE-2024-9487?

• Are you running any instances of GitHub Enterprise Server prior to version 3.15?
• Have you applied the necessary patches to mitigate CVE-2024-9487, especially for SAML SSO configurations?
• Is the “encrypted assertions” feature in SAML enabled on your GitHub Enterprise Server? If so, have you considered disabling it as a temporary mitigation?
• Have you implemented network access restrictions or monitoring mechanisms to detect unauthorized access attempts?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

• Upgrade GitHub Enterprise Server to one of the following patched versions: 3.11.16, 3.12.10, 3.13.5, or 3.14.2.
• If upgrading is not feasible immediately, disable the “encrypted assertions” feature within SAML configurations to mitigate the risk temporarily.
• Restrict network access to GitHub Enterprise Server to minimize exposure and reduce the attack surface.
• Monitor user access logs and network activity for any unusual authentication events or user provisioning activities that could indicate attempted exploitation.

How TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite for this vulnerability

Black Kite published the GitHub Enterprise FocusTag on October 14, 2024, offering in-depth insights into which vendors are exposed to this critical SAML SSO authentication bypass vulnerability. TPRM professionals can leverage this tag to identify at-risk vendors quickly, enabling faster remediation and risk mitigation. Additionally, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ provide a unique advantage by supplying the IP addresses and subdomains associated with vulnerable instances, allowing organizations to take swift, targeted action to secure their supply chain.

ENHANCING TPRM STRATEGIES WITH BLACK KITE’S FOCUSTAGS™

In an ever-evolving cybersecurity landscape, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ serve as a powerful tool to manage third-party risks efficiently. This week’s vulnerabilities in Oracle WebLogic Server and GitHub Enterprise exemplify how high-profile security flaws can cascade through supply chains, affecting multiple vendors and partners. With FocusTags™, you can stay ahead of these threats by:

• Instant Risk Identification: Quickly pinpoint which vendors in your supply chain are impacted by emerging vulnerabilities like CVE-2024-21216 and CVE-2024-9487, ensuring a fast and focused response.
• Risk Prioritization: FocusTags™ allow you to prioritize risks based on the criticality of affected vendors and the severity of vulnerabilities, ensuring your TPRM efforts are aligned with the highest potential risks.
• Vendor Engagement: Black Kite’s FocusTags™ equip you with detailed insights that facilitate meaningful discussions with your vendors, particularly about how they are addressing these specific vulnerabilities.
• Holistic Cybersecurity Posture: By providing a comprehensive view of the threat landscape, FocusTags™ enhance your overall cybersecurity strategy, helping you to address not just the vulnerabilities of today but also prepare for the risks of tomorrow.

Black Kite’s FocusTags™ continue to be an invaluable asset for TPRM professionals, offering real-time insights and targeted recommendations to help mitigate third-party risks associated with high-profile vulnerabilities.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• Oracle WebLogic Server: CVE-2024-21216, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Oracle WebLogic Server.
• GitHub Enterprise: CVE-2024-9487, SAML SSO Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in GitHub Enterprise Server.
• Fortinet Core Products: CVE-2024-23113, Format String Vulnerability in FortiOS, FortiPAM, FortiProxy, and FortiWeb. 
• Cisco RV Routers: CVE-2024-20393, CVE-2024-20470, Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerability in RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P Dual WAN Gigabit VPN Routers. 
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-37404, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure & Policy Secure.
• Zimbra: CVE-2024-45519, Remote Command Execution Vulnerability in Zimbra.
• DrayTek Routers: CVE-2020-15415, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in DrayTek Vigor Routers.
• Authentik: CVE-2024-47070, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in Authentik.
• Octopus Deploy: CVE-2024-9194, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Octopus Server.
• pgAdmin: CVE-2024-9014, OAuth2 Authentication Vulnerability in pgAdmin.
• Keycloak: CVE-2024-8698, CVE-2024-8883, SAML Signature Validation Bypass and Session Hijacking Vulnerability in Keycloak.
• Navidrome: CVE-2024-47062, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Navidrome.
• PAN-OS Cleartext: CVE-2024-8687, Cleartext Exposure Security Flaw in PAN-OS, GlobalProtect, Prisma Access.
• FileCatalyst Workflow: CVE-2024-6633, CVE-2024-6632, Insecure Default Configuration and SQL Injection Vulnerability in Fortra FileCatalyst Workflow.
• WPML: CVE-2024-6386, Critical Remote Code Execution Vulnerability via Twig Server-Side Template Injection in WPML Plugin
• SonicWall Firewalls: CVE-2024-40766, Critical Improper Access Control Vulnerability in SonicWall Firewalls
• Dahua IP Camera: CVE-2021-33045, CVE-2021-33044, Critical Authentication Bypass Vulnerabilities in Dahua IP Camera Systems

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-21216

https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2024.html

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9487

https://securityonline.info/github-enterprise-server-patches-critical-security-flaw-cve-2024-9487-cvss-9-5

https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.14/admin/release-notes#3.14.2

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: TPRM INSIGHTS INTO ORACLE WEBLOGIC SERVER AND GITHUB ENTERPRISE VULNERABILITIES appeared first on Black Kite.

Written By: Ferdi Gül

Welcome to this week’s Focus Friday blog, where we delve into high-profile cybersecurity incidents from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This week, we examine critical vulnerabilities affecting Fortinet Core Products, Cisco RV Routers, and Ivanti Connect Secure. These vulnerabilities present significant risks, from privilege escalation to remote code execution, impacting enterprise security across various sectors. Understanding and addressing these issues are essential to maintaining a strong security posture and mitigating potential breaches.

CVE-2024-23113: Fortinet Core Products Format String Vulnerability

What is the Fortinet Core Products Format String Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-23113 is a critical format string vulnerability affecting Fortinet products, including FortiOS, FortiProxy, FortiPAM, and FortiSwitchManager. This flaw allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code by sending specially crafted requests to the affected systems. The vulnerability, with a CVSS score of 9.8 and an EPSS score of 0.80%, was disclosed in February 2024 and added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on October 9, 2024. Although no proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit code has been publicly released, threat actors are focusing on exploiting vulnerabilities in Fortinet systems to breach corporate networks, aiming to launch ransomware attacks or engage in cyber espionage. Therefore, it is recommended to upgrade the Fortinet’s products to the patched versions.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About This Vulnerability?

For TPRM professionals, vulnerabilities in Fortinet core products are highly concerning because these systems are often deployed in sensitive enterprise environments. If exploited, CVE-2024-23113 could allow attackers to take control of Fortinet systems, execute arbitrary commands, and compromise the entire network. This risk is particularly critical in environments where FortiOS is used to secure sensitive operations, including financial transactions, communications, and administrative controls. The vulnerability’s ability to bypass authentication and execute commands remotely makes it a prime target for ransomware attacks and cyber espionage.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About This Vulnerability?

To mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-23113, TPRM professionals should ask vendors the following questions:

1. Have you updated all instances of FortiOS, FortiProxy, FortiPAM, and FortiSwitchManager to the latest versions (FortiOS: 7.4.3, 7.2.7, or 7.0.14 or above, FortiProxy: 7.4.3, 7.2.9, or 7.0.16 or above, FortiSwitchManager: 7.2.4 or 7.0.4 or above) to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-23113?
2. Have you implemented the recommended action of disabling FGFM access for each interface until the system can be updated, and closely observing network activity for any abnormal behavior that may indicate attempted exploitation of this vulnerability?
3. Can you confirm if you have restricted FGFM connections to specific IPs as an additional mitigation step, even though it does not fully prevent exploitation and should be treated as a temporary solution until patching is completed?
4. For FortiPAM, have you migrated to fixed releases as no specific patches are provided for vulnerable versions to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-23113?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

Vendors using affected Fortinet products should:

• Apply patches immediately to upgrade FortiOS to versions 7.4.3, 7.2.7, or 7.0.14 and similar versions for FortiProxy and FortiSwitchManager.
• Disable FGFM access temporarily, or restrict it to specific trusted IPs to minimize exposure.
• Implement local-in policies to restrict access to FGFM services.
• Monitor network activity closely for signs of exploitation, and review access logs regularly.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite provides the Fortinet Core Products FocusTag to help identify vendors with potential exposure to CVE-2024-23113. The tag, first published on October 9, 2024, allows TPRM professionals to identify at-risk vendors by mapping affected assets like IP addresses and subdomains. This enables targeted risk assessments and allows professionals to prioritize outreach and remediation efforts for the most vulnerable vendors. Black Kite’s ability to provide real-time intelligence on exploited vulnerabilities is a key differentiator in managing third-party risks.

CVE-2024-20393 and CVE-2024-20470: Cisco RV Routers Privilege Escalation and Remote Code Execution Vulnerabilities

What are the Cisco RV Routers Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerabilities?

CVE-2024-20393 and CVE-2024-20470 are high-severity vulnerabilities impacting Cisco RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P VPN Routers. CVE-2024-20393 enables privilege escalation, while CVE-2024-20470 allows remote code execution. Both vulnerabilities involve weaknesses in the web-based management interface and can be exploited by an authenticated attacker with limited privileges. With CVSS scores of 7.2 and 8.8, respectively, these flaws pose serious risks to network integrity and sensitive data.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About These Vulnerabilities?

For organizations using Cisco RV routers, these vulnerabilities can severely compromise network security. If exploited, attackers can escalate privileges or execute arbitrary code, leading to unauthorized access to sensitive data or full system takeover. Given that these routers are often used in business-critical environments, failing to address these vulnerabilities may result in breaches, data exfiltration, or service disruption.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About These Vulnerabilities?

1. Have you checked and confirmed that the remote management feature is disabled on all your Cisco Small Business RV Series routers, specifically the RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P models, to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-20393 and CVE-2024-20470?
2. Given that Cisco has not provided any patches or workarounds for these vulnerabilities, have you considered replacing the affected Cisco Small Business RV Series routers with more secure alternatives that receive active support and security updates?
3. Can you confirm if you have implemented network monitoring solutions to detect any suspicious activity that could indicate an exploitation of the privilege escalation and remote code execution vulnerabilities (CVE-2024-20393 and CVE-2024-20470) in the Cisco Small Business RV Series routers?
4. Have you taken steps to restrict network access to the affected Cisco Small Business RV Series routers to local connections only, as a measure to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-20393 and CVE-2024-20470?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

• Disable remote management immediately.
• Migrate to secure router models, as these devices no longer receive software support.
• Restrict network exposure to local traffic only.
• Monitor network traffic for suspicious activity related to privilege escalation or RCE attempts.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for These Vulnerabilities?

Black Kite’s Cisco RV Routers FocusTag helps TPRM professionals identify vendors at risk from these vulnerabilities. Published on October 7, 2024, the FocusTag offers real-time data on vulnerable assets, allowing organizations to prioritize mitigation efforts and reduce exposure. By providing asset-specific intelligence such as IP addresses and vulnerable systems, Black Kite enables more focused risk management.

CVE-2024-37404: Ivanti Connect Secure Remote Code Execution Vulnerability

What is the Ivanti Connect Secure RCE Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-37404 is a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability affecting Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure products. This flaw, caused by improper input validation in the admin portal during the Certificate Signing Request (CSR) generation process, allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code. With a CVSS score of 9.1, this vulnerability poses a significant risk, potentially allowing attackers to take full control of vulnerable systems. The issue was first disclosed in October 2024, and while no known exploitation has been observed in the wild, a proof-of-concept (PoC) has been published, demonstrating how the attack can be carried out by manipulating configuration files through specially crafted input. 

In previous discussions on ICS, we noted that the Chinese nation-state-linked threat actor UTA0178 is suspected of exploiting these systems. MITRE research highlights the ROOTROT webshell tool, used by attackers to execute commands, steal credentials, exfiltrate files, and more. Vulnerabilities in ICS devices are exploited to propagate the Mirai botnet, leading to large-scale DDoS attacks and other cyber threats.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About this Vulnerability?

For organizations utilizing Ivanti Connect Secure, this vulnerability could lead to complete system compromise. Given the privileged role these systems play in secure communications and network management, the exploitation of this flaw could result in data breaches, system disruptions, and potential ransomware attacks. Attackers could use compromised admin credentials to access and exploit this vulnerability, especially in environments where access controls are weak or multi-factor authentication (MFA) is not implemented.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About This Vulnerability?

1. Have you upgraded all instances of Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure to versions 22.7R2.1, 22.7R2.2, and 22.7R1.1 respectively to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-37404?
2. Can you confirm if you have implemented the recommended mitigation measures such as enabling admin access only on the management interface, monitoring network traffic for unusual activities, and strengthening password policies and MFA protections?
3. Have you taken steps to prevent the injection of Carriage Return Line Feed (CRLF) characters into input fields in the admin portal, specifically in the Certificate Signing Request (CSR) generation process, to prevent the manipulation of configuration files and loading of malicious libraries?
4. Can you confirm if you have implemented measures to detect and prevent the uploading of malicious ZIP files masquerading as client logs, which could lead to remote code execution and granting of root-level access to the system?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

Vendors using Authentik should follow these remediation steps:

• Update to the latest versions of Ivanti Connect Secure (22.7R2.1 or 9.1R18.9 when available) and Ivanti Policy Secure (22.7R1.1).
• Restrict admin access to internal networks and ensure it is protected by a firewall or jump host.
• Enforce strong access controls, including MFA and password vaults, to limit exposure.
• Enable admin logging and monitor for suspicious activity involving administrative credentials.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite provides the Ivanti Connect Secure FocusTag, which helps TPRM professionals identify vendors at risk of this vulnerability. Published in October 2024, this FocusTag delivers critical insights into affected assets, allowing TPRM professionals to prioritize vendors that need immediate remediation. This targeted intelligence aids in reducing exposure by focusing on the vendors most likely to be impacted by CVE-2024-37404, helping organizations streamline their third-party risk management processes.

By providing detailed asset information such as vulnerable subdomains or IP addresses, Black Kite allows its customers to operationalize these insights and reduce the potential risk from vendors who might be compromised through this vulnerability.

Maximizing TPRM Effectiveness With Black Kite’s FocusTags™

Black Kite’s FocusTags are indispensable tools for refining Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) strategies. Here’s how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ empower organizations to effectively manage vulnerabilities like those in Fortinet Core Products, Cisco RV Routers, and Ivanti Connect Secure:

• Real-Time Risk Identification: FocusTags instantly identify vendors impacted by critical vulnerabilities, enabling organizations to react swiftly and mitigate threats before they escalate.
• Targeted Risk Prioritization: By assessing both the severity of the vulnerability and the criticality of the affected vendors, FocusTags help allocate resources efficiently to address the most pressing risks.
• Informed Vendor Engagement: These tags facilitate deeper discussions with vendors about their exposure and remediation plans, ensuring that conversations are focused and actionable.
• Comprehensive Security Enhancement: With a broad view of the threat landscape, FocusTags strengthen the overall security posture, allowing TPRM professionals to adapt their strategies to the latest cyber risks.

Incorporating Black Kite’s FocusTags into your TPRM processes ensures that your organization remains proactive and responsive to the rapidly evolving cyber threat environment, empowering you to manage third-party risks effectively and safeguard your enterprise.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• Fortinet Core Products: CVE-2024-23113, Format String Vulnerability in FortiOS, FortiPAM, FortiProxy, and FortiWeb. 
• Cisco RV Routers: CVE-2024-20393, CVE-2024-20470, Privilege Escalation and RCE Vulnerability in RV340, RV340W, RV345, and RV345P Dual WAN Gigabit VPN Routers. 
• Ivanti Connect Secure: CVE-2024-37404, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Ivanti Connect Secure & Policy Secure.
• Zimbra: CVE-2024-45519, Remote Command Execution Vulnerability in Zimbra.
• DrayTek Routers: CVE-2020-15415, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in DrayTek Vigor Routers.
• Authentik: CVE-2024-47070, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in Authentik.
• Octopus Deploy: CVE-2024-9194, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Octopus Server.
• pgAdmin: CVE-2024-9014, OAuth2 Authentication Vulnerability in pgAdmin.
• Keycloak: CVE-2024-8698, CVE-2024-8883, SAML Signature Validation Bypass and Session Hijacking Vulnerability in Keycloak.
• Navidrome: CVE-2024-47062, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Navidrome.
• PAN-OS Cleartext: CVE-2024-8687, Cleartext Exposure Security Flaw in PAN-OS, GlobalProtect, Prisma Access.
• FileCatalyst Workflow: CVE-2024-6633, CVE-2024-6632, Insecure Default Configuration and SQL Injection Vulnerability in Fortra FileCatalyst Workflow.
• WPML: CVE-2024-6386, Critical Remote Code Execution Vulnerability via Twig Server-Side Template Injection in WPML Plugin
• SonicWall Firewalls: CVE-2024-40766, Critical Improper Access Control Vulnerability in SonicWall Firewalls
• Dahua IP Camera: CVE-2021-33045, CVE-2021-33044, Critical Authentication Bypass Vulnerabilities in Dahua IP Camera Systems
• Microsoft Privilege Escalation Vulnerability: CVE-2024-38193, CVE-2024-38106, CVE-2024-38107, Critical Privilege Escalation Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Windows
• SolarWinds WHD: CVE-2024-28986, Critical Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in SolarWinds Web Help Desk

References

https://www.fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-029

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-23113

Cisco Security Advisory – Cisco Small Business RV34x VPN Routers Privilege Escalation and Remote CodeExecution Vulnerabilities

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-20393

https://forums.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-Ivanti-Connect-Secure-and-Policy-Secure-CVE-2024-37404?language=en_US

https://securityonline.info/cve-2024-37404-critical-rce-flaw-discovered-in-ivanti-connect-secure-policy-secure-poc-published

https://blackkite.com/blog/focus-friday-tprm-challenges-in-the-face-of-ivanti-ics-cacti-sonicwall-confluence-and-citrix-vulnerabilities

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: INSIGHTS INTO THIRD-PARTY RISKS IN FORTINET CORE PRODUCTS, CISCO RV ROUTERS, AND IVANTI CONNECT SECURE VULNERABILITIES appeared first on Black Kite.

Written By: Ferdi Gül
Contributor: Ferhat Dikbiyik

Welcome to this week’s edition of Focus Friday, where we dive into critical vulnerabilities affecting the third-party ecosystem from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. As organizations face mounting pressure to manage vulnerabilities swiftly and effectively, identifying and addressing these threats becomes crucial for maintaining cybersecurity resilience. In today’s blog, we will explore significant vulnerabilities affecting widely used platforms like Zimbra, DrayTek Routers, Authentik, and Octopus Deploy. These vulnerabilities pose significant risks, potentially allowing unauthorized access, remote command execution, and data breaches. We’ll provide actionable insights and discuss how TPRM professionals can leverage Black Kite’s FocusTags™ to mitigate these risks effectively.

CVE-2024-45519: Zimbra Remote Command Execution Vulnerability

What Is the Zimbra Remote Command Execution Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-45519 is a critical vulnerability in the Zimbra Collaboration Suite that allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands remotely on unpatched Zimbra servers. This vulnerability is caused by improper sanitization of user input within the postjournal service, where the ‘popen’ function is used to construct and execute commands from SMTP recipient addresses. Attackers can exploit this flaw by sending specially crafted SMTP messages that inject malicious commands, leading to unauthorized remote command execution.

The vulnerability, discovered in September 2024, has a high CVSS score of 9.0, marking it as a severe threat. Although no active exploitation has been reported, researchers demonstrated PoC exploits capable of compromising the entire system. This vulnerability has not yet been added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, but it poses a significant risk if left unpatched. The vulnerability in Zimbra Collaboration could potentially be exploited by attackers with the right tools and knowledge, as Zimbra has been a frequent target for malicious actors.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About the Zimbra Vulnerability?

TPRM professionals should pay close attention to this vulnerability due to the critical role that Zimbra plays in email communication and collaboration for many organizations. An attack on this platform can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive emails and files, installation of malware, and further attacks on internal systems. The remote nature of the attack and the unauthenticated access make it particularly dangerous, as threat actors can exploit vulnerable Zimbra instances without any prior credentials.

In addition, Zimbra has historically been a target for malicious actors, increasing the likelihood that threat actors will attempt to leverage CVE-2024-45519 in future campaigns. The potential for full system compromise makes this a high-priority vulnerability for vendor risk management.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the Zimbra Vulnerability?

To address the risk posed by CVE-2024-45519, TPRM professionals should ask the following questions:

1. Have you applied the latest security patches to Zimbra Collaboration Suite, specifically versions 9.0.0 Patch 41, 10.0.9, 10.1.1, or 8.8.15 Patch 46?
2. Have you disabled the postjournal service if it is not required in your Zimbra environment? If so, what procedures have been followed to ensure this service is not in use?
3. Are input sanitization rules and filtering mechanisms in place to prevent the execution of dangerous SMTP commands?
4. What monitoring and detection measures are implemented to identify potential exploitation attempts via SMTP?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

Vendors with Zimbra installations should follow these remediation steps to mitigate the risk of CVE-2024-45519:

• Patch immediately: Update to the latest versions of Zimbra Collaboration Suite, which include critical fixes.
• Disable unnecessary services: If the ‘postjournal’ service is not required, disable it using the appropriate Zimbra configuration commands.
• Enforce input validation: Apply strong input sanitization to SMTP commands to prevent malicious injections.
• Monitor SMTP traffic: Set up continuous monitoring for unusual or malicious SMTP activity that could indicate exploitation attempts.
• Network segmentation: Implement network segmentation to limit lateral movement if a Zimbra system is compromised.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite helps TPRM professionals quickly identify vendors potentially affected by CVE-2024-45519. The FocusTag for Zimbra was published on September 30, 2024, providing users with critical intelligence about vulnerable Zimbra assets within their vendor ecosystem. This intelligence includes IP addresses and subdomains that are associated with vulnerable Zimbra servers.

CVE-2020-15415: DrayTek Routers Remote Code Execution Vulnerability

What Is the DrayTek Routers Remote Code Execution Vulnerability?

CVE-2020-15415 is a critical remote code execution vulnerability impacting DrayTek Vigor3900, Vigor2960, and Vigor300B routers. This vulnerability arises from improper validation of filenames with shell metacharacters during the upload of configuration files via the WebUI endpoint cgi-bin/mainfunction.cgi/cvmcfgupload. By exploiting this flaw, attackers can send specially crafted HTTP POST requests that allow them to execute arbitrary commands on the affected devices, potentially compromising the entire system.

With a CVSS score of 9.8, this vulnerability is categorized as critical. The EPSS score is 94.31%, indicating a notable chance of exploitation. The vulnerability was added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on September 30, 2024, highlighting its severity and risk of exploitation in the wild. Proof-of-concept exploits are available, increasing the likelihood of malicious actors targeting vulnerable systems.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About the DrayTek Routers Vulnerability?

DrayTek routers play a significant role in network infrastructure for businesses, providing remote access and connectivity across multiple devices. A remote code execution vulnerability on these devices could lead to unauthorized access, data exfiltration, and complete system compromise. Given that these routers may be deployed in critical business environments, the impact of a breach could extend beyond the initial router, leading to further network infiltration or exploitation of connected systems.

For TPRM professionals, ensuring that vendors using DrayTek routers are secured against CVE-2020-15415 is vital to preventing unauthorized access to critical data or systems. Exploitation could enable attackers to carry out further attacks, such as malware installation or network manipulation.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the DrayTek Routers Vulnerability?

To mitigate the risk associated with CVE-2020-15415, TPRM professionals should consider asking vendors the following questions:

1. Have you applied the firmware update released by DrayTek for Vigor3900, Vigor2960, and Vigor300B routers to address CVE-2020-15415?
2. Are you limiting remote administrative access to trusted IP addresses using an Access Control List (ACL)?
3. Have you disabled remote administration on affected devices if it is not necessary?
4. What monitoring procedures are in place to detect any unusual or malicious activity on your DrayTek routers?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

Vendors using DrayTek routers should follow these remediation steps:

• Firmware Update: Upgrade to the latest firmware (1.5.1.1 or later) to patch the vulnerability.
• Disable Remote Access: If immediate upgrading is not feasible, disable remote access to the affected routers or restrict access using ACLs.
• Use Secure Remote Administration: Switch to secure methods such as VPN or VigorACS for remote device administration.
• Monitor Device Activity: Regularly monitor traffic and system logs for unusual activity that may indicate an attempted or successful exploit.
• Regular Firmware Checks: Ensure that firmware is kept up to date across all DrayTek devices to mitigate exposure to future vulnerabilities.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite provides valuable insights by identifying vendors using potentially vulnerable DrayTek routers affected by CVE-2020-15415. The FocusTag for DrayTek routers was published on September 30, 2024, offering actionable intelligence on vulnerable assets, including device IP addresses and configurations. By leveraging this data, TPRM professionals can quickly narrow down at-risk vendors and prioritize outreach to those most vulnerable to attack.

CVE-2024-47070: Authentik Authentication Bypass Vulnerability

What Is the Authentik Authentication Bypass Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-47070 is a critical vulnerability in Authentik, an open-source Identity Provider (IdP) and Single Sign-On (SSO) platform. The flaw exists due to improper handling of the X-Forwarded-For HTTP header in reverse proxy setups. Attackers can manipulate this header by sending an unparsable value (e.g., “a”), which tricks Authentik into bypassing password authentication policies. This allows unauthorized access to user accounts if the attacker knows the login or email address, bypassing the need for the correct password.

This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 9.0, marking it as critical. It affects Authentik versions up to and including 2024.8.2 and 2024.6.4. While no active exploitation or PoC has been publicly released, the risk remains significant, especially in environments where Authentik is accessible without a properly configured reverse proxy.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About the Authentik Vulnerability?

TPRM professionals should be highly concerned about CVE-2024-6386 due to its potential impact on WordPress sites using the WPML plugin. WordPress is a widely adopted content management system, and any vulnerability that allows for remote code execution poses a substantial risk. An attacker exploiting this vulnerability could gain unauthorized control over a website, execute malicious code, manipulate content, steal sensitive data, or even deface the site. In environments where WordPress sites are used for critical business functions, such a compromise could lead to significant data breaches, reputational damage, and operational disruptions. It is crucial for TPRM professionals to ensure that their vendors using WordPress and the WPML plugin are aware of this vulnerability and have implemented appropriate measures to mitigate the risk.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the Authentik Vulnerability?

To address the risk posed by CVE-2024-47070, TPRM professionals should ask vendors the following questions:

1. Have you upgraded to Authentik version 2024.6.5 or 2024.8.3 to address CVE-2024-47070?
2. Is your reverse proxy correctly configured to set valid X-Forwarded-For headers, ensuring that this vulnerability cannot be exploited?
3. What measures are in place to monitor and detect suspicious activity related to authentication bypass attempts in your system?
4. Have you disabled direct internet exposure of Authentik where possible, or applied proper access controls if external access is required?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

Vendors using Authentik should follow these remediation steps:

• Apply Patches: Upgrade to Authentik versions 2024.6.5 or 2024.8.3, which include the fixes for CVE-2024-47070.
• Configure Reverse Proxy: Ensure that the reverse proxy is set to properly handle and validate the X-Forwarded-For header.
• Limit Direct Exposure: Avoid exposing Authentik directly to the internet without a secure reverse proxy configuration.
• Manual Workaround: If patching is not immediately possible, set the “Failure result” option on policy bindings to “Pass” to prevent authentication policy bypass, though this is a temporary and less secure workaround.
• Monitor Traffic: Continuously monitor network and authentication logs for unusual activities that may indicate exploitation attempts.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite enables TPRM professionals to swiftly identify vendors using vulnerable versions of Authentik through its FocusTag system. The FocusTag for Authentik was published on October 1, 2024, providing comprehensive intelligence on at-risk vendors, including specific vulnerable assets. With this information, TPRM teams can prioritize remediation efforts, focusing on vendors using outdated or misconfigured Authentik systems.

CVE-2024-9194: Octopus Deploy SQL Injection Vulnerability

What Is the Octopus Deploy SQL Injection Vulnerability?

CVE-2024-9194 is a high-severity SQL injection vulnerability in Octopus Server. This vulnerability is due to improper parameter handling within the REST API, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands. By exploiting this flaw, attackers could gain unauthorized access to the database, potentially exposing sensitive project data and deployment configurations.

This vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.7. Although there is no active exploitation or available PoC, the critical nature of SQL injection vulnerabilities makes this a significant concern. The vulnerability was discovered in October 2024, and organizations using affected versions of Octopus Server are strongly advised to prioritize patching.

Why Should TPRM Professionals Care About the Octopus Deploy Vulnerability?

SQL injection vulnerabilities can have a significant impact on an organization, as they may allow attackers to access or manipulate sensitive data. Octopus Server is commonly used to manage application deployments, and unauthorized access to its configurations could lead to major disruptions in the deployment process. Additionally, sensitive data related to projects and infrastructure could be exposed.

For TPRM professionals, this vulnerability poses a risk to any vendors relying on Octopus Deploy for their DevOps and deployment workflows. Unauthorized access to these systems could result in data leakage, malicious code injection, or compromised deployments, which could directly impact business operations.

What Questions Should TPRM Professionals Ask Vendors About the Octopus Deploy Vulnerability?

To mitigate the risks associated with CVE-2024-9194, TPRM professionals should ask vendors the following questions:

1. Have you upgraded to the fixed versions of Octopus Server (2024.1.13038, 2024.2.9482, or 2024.3.12766) to address CVE-2024-9194?
2. If patching is not immediately possible, have you disabled the “Guest” feature to reduce the risk of exploitation?
3. What measures are in place to monitor and log database access for unusual or suspicious activity?
4. How are you ensuring the security of deployment configurations to prevent unauthorized access or modification?

Remediation Recommendations for Vendors Subject to This Risk

Vendors using Octopus Deploy should follow these remediation steps:

• Apply Patches: Upgrade to the fixed versions (2024.1.13038, 2024.2.9482, or 2024.3.12766) as soon as possible to mitigate the vulnerability.
• Disable Guest Access: Temporarily disable the “Guest” feature if patching is not immediately feasible.
• Monitor Database Access: Implement continuous monitoring of database logs and activities to detect any unusual access patterns.
• Review Deployment Security: Regularly review and update deployment configurations to ensure they are secure and inaccessible to unauthorized users.

How Can TPRM Professionals Leverage Black Kite for This Vulnerability?

Black Kite provides detailed intelligence on vendors affected by CVE-2024-9194, helping TPRM professionals identify and prioritize remediation efforts. The FocusTag for Octopus Deploy was published on October 2, 2024, offering insights into vulnerable assets, including details about affected versions and system configurations. This allows organizations to quickly assess their third-party risks and focus on ensuring that vendors using Octopus Deploy have patched their systems.

Black Kite’s asset-based approach enables TPRM teams to operationalize this data, reducing the time and effort needed to address the vulnerability. By providing specific asset information, Black Kite makes it easier for professionals to take immediate action to mitigate the risks posed by this SQL injection vulnerability.

Maximizing TPRM Effectiveness With Black Kite’s FocusTags™

In the ever-evolving cybersecurity landscape, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ are instrumental in enhancing Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) strategies. By offering real-time insights into emerging vulnerabilities, these tags enable TPRM professionals to stay ahead of potential risks and make informed decisions regarding vendor security.

Here’s how Black Kite’s FocusTags™ empower organizations to effectively manage vulnerabilities like those in Zimbra, DrayTek Routers, Authentik, and Octopus Deploy:

• Dynamic Risk Identification: Instantly highlight vendors impacted by critical vulnerabilities, allowing for rapid response and mitigation efforts.
• Risk-Based Prioritization: Enable the prioritization of vulnerabilities based on the severity of the risk and the importance of the affected vendors, ensuring resources are allocated efficiently.
• Enhanced Vendor Engagement: Provide TPRM teams with the necessary tools to engage vendors in meaningful discussions about their security posture and remediation strategies.
• Strengthening Cybersecurity Posture: Deliver a comprehensive view of the current threat landscape, supporting the development of stronger and more adaptive cybersecurity strategies.

By transforming complex vulnerability data into actionable intelligence, Black Kite’s FocusTags™ make it easier for organizations to tackle critical vulnerabilities and safeguard their third-party ecosystems. With real-time updates and deep insights into vendor exposures, Black Kite helps TPRM professionals mitigate risks proactively and effectively.

About Focus Friday

Every week, we delve into the realms of critical vulnerabilities and their implications from a Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) perspective. This series is dedicated to shedding light on pressing cybersecurity threats, offering in-depth analyses, and providing actionable insights.

FocusTags™ in the Last 30 Days:

• Zimbra: CVE-2024-45519, Remote Command Execution Vulnerability in Zimbra.
• DrayTek Routers: CVE-2020-15415, Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in DrayTek Vigor Routers.
• Authentik: CVE-2024-47070, Authentication Bypass Vulnerability in Authentik.
• Octopus Deploy: CVE-2024-9194, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Octopus Server.
• pgAdmin: CVE-2024-9014, OAuth2 Authentication Vulnerability in pgAdmin.
• Keycloak: CVE-2024-8698, CVE-2024-8883, SAML Signature Validation Bypass and Session Hijacking Vulnerability in Keycloak.
• Navidrome: CVE-2024-47062, SQL Injection Vulnerability in Navidrome.
• PAN-OS Cleartext: CVE-2024-8687, Cleartext Exposure Security Flaw in PAN-OS, GlobalProtect, Prisma Access.
• FileCatalyst Workflow: CVE-2024-6633, CVE-2024-6632, Insecure Default Configuration and SQL Injection Vulnerability in Fortra FileCatalyst Workflow.
• WPML: CVE-2024-6386, Critical Remote Code Execution Vulnerability via Twig Server-Side Template Injection in WPML Plugin
• SonicWall Firewalls: CVE-2024-40766, Critical Improper Access Control Vulnerability in SonicWall Firewalls
• Dahua IP Camera: CVE-2021-33045, CVE-2021-33044, Critical Authentication Bypass Vulnerabilities in Dahua IP Camera Systems
• Microsoft Privilege Escalation Vulnerability: CVE-2024-38193, CVE-2024-38106, CVE-2024-38107, Critical Privilege Escalation Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Windows
• SolarWinds WHD: CVE-2024-28986, Critical Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in SolarWinds Web Help Desk
• Zimbra LFI: CVE-2024-33535, Local File Inclusion Vulnerability in Zimbra Collaboration Suite
• Exchange Server RCE: CVE-2021-31196, CVE-2021-34473, Remote Code Execution Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Exchange Server

References

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-45519

https://wiki.zimbra.com/wiki/Zimbra_Security_Advisories

https://blog.projectdiscovery.io/zimbra-remote-code-execution

https://github.com/p33d/CVE-2024-45519

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-15415

https://www.draytek.co.uk/support/security-advisories/kb-advisory-jun20

https://www.draytek.com/about/security-advisory/vigor3900-/-vigor2960-/-vigor300b-remote-code-injection/execution-vulnerability-(cve-2020-14472)

https://github.com/CLP-team/Vigor-Commond-Injection

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47070

https://github.com/goauthentik/authentik/security/advisories/GHSA-7jxf-mmg9-9hg7

https://advisories.octopus.com/post/2024/sa2024-09

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9194

The post FOCUS FRIDAY: THIRD-PARTY RISK INSIGHTS ON ZIMBRA, DrayTek ROUTERS, AUTHENTIK, AND OCTOPUS DEPLOY VULNERABILITIES appeared first on Black Kite.