Duo Authentication For Windows Logon And RdpApplication · Cisco
CVE-2024-20292
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in the logging component of Cisco Duo Authentication for Windows Logon and RDP could allow an authenticated, local attacker to view sensitive information in clear text on an affected system. This vulnerability is due to improper storage of an unencrypted registry key in certain logs. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by accessing the logs on an affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to view sensitive information in clear text.
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 · moderate confidenceThe logging component of Cisco Duo Authentication for Windows Logon and RDP stores an unencrypted registry key in certain log files. An authenticated local attacker with access to these logs can view sensitive information in clear text.
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
Duo Authentication For Windows Logon And RdpApplication
>= 4.0.0, < 4.3.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Verify Cisco Duo Authentication for Windows is installedCheck for the presence of the software in Programs and Features, or look for the installation directory typically under C:\Program Files\Duo Security\Duo Authentication for Windows LogonAffected if The software is not installed or the installation cannot be found, then the system is not affected
-
Determine the installed versionCheck the Windows registry key at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Duo Security\Duo Authentication for Windows Logon for the Version value, or right-click the DuoCredProv.dll file in the installation directory and view Properties > DetailsAffected if The installed version is 4.0.0 or higher but lower than 4.3.0, indicating the system falls within the affected version range
-
Confirm logging is enabledCheck the Windows registry key at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Duo Security\Duo Authentication for Windows Logon\Logging to see if logging is turned on, or look for the presence of log files in the installation directoryAffected if Logging is enabled and log files exist, as the vulnerability only affects systems where the logging component is active
-
Inspect log files for sensitive informationOpen any log files in the Duo Authentication for Windows Logon directory (typically in C:\ProgramData\Duo Security\Log or the installation folder) and search for plaintext registry key data or credentialsAffected if Log files contain unencrypted registry keys, authentication secrets, or other sensitive data in clear text, confirming the vulnerability is present and exploitable
A system is affected if Cisco Duo Authentication for Windows Logon and RDP version 4.0.0 through 4.2.x is installed with logging enabled and log files contain unencrypted 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 · scoped4.3.0
Apply the vendor patch from Cisco when available. In the interim, restrict access to the affected application's log files to only privileged administrators.
4.3.0 or later
- Identify current installed version of Duo Authentication for Windows Logon and RDP
- Download the fixed version (4.3.0 or later) from the official Cisco Duo download portal or through your Duo administrator account
- Follow Cisco's standard upgrade procedure for Duo Authentication for Windows Logon and RDP
- Verify the installation completed successfully
- Review updated log files to confirm sensitive information is no longer stored in clear text
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Duo Authentication For Windows Logon And Rdp
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-20292 — 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-2024-20292 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