CVE-2024-11669
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn issue was discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.9.8 before 17.4.5, 17.5 before 17.5.3, and 17.6 before 17.6.1. Certain API endpoints could potentially allow unauthorized access to sensitive data due to overly broad application of token scopes.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceGitLab CE/EE versions 16.9.8 through 17.6.0 contain a flaw where certain API endpoints apply token scopes too broadly, potentially allowing authenticated users to access sensitive data beyond what their intended token permissions should permit. This is an authorization bypass via overly permissive OAuth/access token scope enforcement.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 16.9.8, < 17.4.5>= 17.5.0, < 17.5.3= 17.6.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed GitLab versionRun `sudo gitlab-rake gitlab:version` or check the GitLab admin area under Help > Version to obtain the exact version numberAffected if The installed version falls within 16.9.8 to 17.4.4, 17.5.0 to 17.5.2, or equals 17.6.0
-
Review OAuth applicationsNavigate to GitLab admin area > Applications or user settings > Applications to list all configured OAuth applicationsAffected if Any OAuth applications exist and the GitLab version is affected, as token scopes may be enforced too broadly for these applications
-
Review personal access tokens with API or read_api scopeIn GitLab, go to User Settings > Access Tokens to see all active personal access tokens, particularly those with api, read_api, or similar scope permissionsAffected if Tokens with elevated scopes exist and the GitLab version is affected, potentially allowing broader access than intended
-
Examine API audit logs for anomalous accessCheck GitLab audit logs under Admin Area > Monitoring > Audit Events or project/repository audit logs for API calls that may have accessed resources outside expected token scopeAffected if API activity shows access to resources that should be restricted based on the token scope assigned, indicating the scope enforcement flaw may have been exploited
A user is affected if their GitLab installation version is 16.9.8-17.4.4, 17.5.0-17.5.2, or 17.6.0 AND they have OAuth applications or tokens with scopes configured, as the broad scope enforcement could have allowed unauthorized access to sensitive data.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped17.4.517.5.3
Upgrade GitLab to version 17.4.5, 17.5.3, 17.6.1 or later. Review existing API tokens and their assigned scopes to ensure no unauthorized access occurred prior to patching.
GitLab 17.6.1 or later (latest stable 17.6.x release)
- 1. Identify current GitLab version by navigating to the GitLab administration area or running 'gitlab-rake gitlab:env:info'
- 2. If running GitLab 16.9.8 through 17.4.4: upgrade to GitLab 17.4.5 or later (preferably latest 17.4.x stable)
- 3. If running GitLab 17.5.0 through 17.5.2: upgrade to GitLab 17.5.3 or later (preferably latest 17.5.x stable)
- 4. If running GitLab 17.6.0: upgrade to GitLab 17.6.1 or later (preferably latest 17.6.x stable)
- 5. If running an older major version (pre-16.9), first upgrade to a version within the affected range, then proceed to a fixed version
- 6. After upgrade, verify the GitLab instance is functioning correctly and review API access tokens to ensure scopes are appropriately configured
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-11669 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-11669 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data