CVE-2024-2244
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 · uneditedREST service authentication anomaly with “valid username/no password” credential combination for batch job processing resulting in successful service invocation. The anomaly doesn’t exist with other credential combinations.
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 vulnerability is an authentication bypass in a REST service's batch job processing endpoint where a valid username combined with an empty or missing password successfully authenticates, while other credential combinations behave correctly. This indicates flawed authentication logic that conditionally accepts certain credential patterns.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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.
-
Locate the batch job processing endpointIdentify the REST service's batch job processing endpoint in your environment. This is typically a URL path related to batch jobs or scheduled tasks (e.g., /api/batch, /batch/jobs, /api/v1/jobs). Check your API documentation or service configuration for endpoint definitions.Affected if The batch job processing endpoint exists and is network-accessible
-
Identify valid user accountsDetermine if there are user accounts configured for the REST service that have access to the batch job processing functionality. Review user role assignments or service account configurations.Affected if There are valid user accounts with access to the batch job processing endpoint
-
Test authentication with valid username and empty passwordSend an authentication request to the batch job processing endpoint using a valid username with an empty string or completely omitted password field. Capture the HTTP response and session/token outcome.Affected if The authentication request succeeds (returns 200 OK, session token, or access granted) when using a valid username with an empty or missing password
-
Compare with standard authentication behaviorSend the same authentication request using the same valid username but with an incorrect/non-empty password. Compare the HTTP response and authentication outcome against the empty password test.Affected if The empty password authentication succeeds while the wrong password authentication fails, indicating inconsistent credential validation logic
Your environment is affected if the batch job processing endpoint accepts authentication with a valid username combined with an empty or missing password, while rejecting other incorrect password attempts.
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.
From vendor dataFix the authentication logic in the batch job processing endpoint to enforce proper password validation for all authentication attempts, ensuring no credential combination is incorrectly accepted.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-2244 — 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-2024-2244 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