CVE-2024-26270
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 · uneditedThe Account Settings page in Liferay Portal 7.4.3.76 through 7.4.3.99, and Liferay DXP 2023.Q3 before patch 5, and 7.4 update 76 through 92 embeds the user’s hashed password in the page’s HTML source, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to steal a user's hashed password.
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 confidenceThe Account Settings page in affected Liferax Portal and DXP versions embeds the user's hashed password directly into the HTML source code. This occurs during page rendering where the password hash is included as a form field or hidden element, making it accessible to anyone who can view the page source or intercept the HTTP response.
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>= 7.4.3.76, < 7.4.3.100= 7.4= 2023.q3.0= 2023.q3.1= 2023.q3.2= 2023.q3.3= 2023.q3.4CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Check Liferax Portal versionAccess the Liferax Control Panel or examine the portal's build properties file (e.g., portal-impl/src/main/java/com/liferax/PortalConstants.java) to determine the exact version number. Alternatively, check the Liferax Server Info page at /c/portal/maintenance or examine the OSGi bundle version.Affected if The installed version is 7.4.3.76 or higher but lower than 7.4.3.100
-
Check Liferax DXP versionExamine the Liferax DXP installation by checking the release information in the Liferax Control Panel under Server Information, or inspect the liferay-impl version.properties or manifest files in the deployment.Affected if The installed version matches exactly: 7.4, 2023.q3.0, 2023.q3.1, 2023.q3.2, 2023.q3.3, or 2023.q3.4
-
Inspect Account Settings page HTMLLog in as a standard user, navigate to the Account Settings page (typically at /account/settings or /portal/settings/account), then view the page source (right-click > View Page Source or use browser DevTools > Elements tab).Affected if The HTML source contains a visible or hidden form field that includes a bcrypt, SHA-256, or similar password hash value for the logged-in user
-
Intercept HTTP response for Account SettingsUse a web proxy (Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP) or browser DevTools Network tab to capture the HTTP response when loading the Account Settings page. Examine the response body for password hash patterns.Affected if The HTTP response body includes a hashed password value (typically 60-character bcrypt or longer hex-encoded hash) embedded in a form input or hidden field
A user is affected if their Liferax Portal version is between 7.4.3.76 and 7.4.3.99 inclusive, or their DXP version exactly matches 7.4 or any 2023.q3.x variant, AND the Account Settings page HTML exposes a password hash in the response.
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 · scoped7.4.3.100
Apply the vendor-provided patches (2023.Q3 patch 5 or later) or upgrade to Liferax Portal 7.4.3.100+ / DXP 7.4 update 93+ to remove the hashed password from the Account Settings page HTML output.
Limerick Portal 7.4.3.100+ or Limerick DXP 2023.Q3 Patch 5+
- 1. Identify the current installed version of Limerick Portal or DXP by checking the Limerick diagnostics or version information in the control panel.
- 2. For Limerick Portal: Upgrade to version 7.4.3.100 or later, which contains the fix for removing hashed passwords from the Account Settings page HTML.
- 3. For Limerick DXP 2023.Q3: Apply patch 5 (or later) for the 2023.Q3 release line, which addresses this vulnerability.
- 4. After upgrading/applying the patch, verify that the Account Settings page no longer contains the hashed password in the HTML source code.
- 5. Consider forcing password reset for affected users as a precautionary security measure, since hashed passwords were potentially exposed.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-26270 — 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-2024-26270 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