CVE-2024-27277
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 private key for the IBM Storage Protect Plus Server 10.1.0 through 10.1.16 certificate can be disclosed, undermining the security of the certificate. IBM X-Force ID: 285205.
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 private key for IBM Storage Protect Plus Server certificates in versions 10.1.0 through 10.1.16 can be disclosed. This undermines the cryptographic integrity of TLS/SSL communications, potentially allowing attackers to impersonate the server or decrypt sensitive data in transit.
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>= 10.1.0, <= 10.1.6CVSS 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.
-
Identify installed IBM Storage Protect Plus versionRun the IBM Storage Protect Plus version command or check the product's about/info panel to obtain the exact installed version numberAffected if Version is 10.1.0, 10.1.1, 10.1.2, 10.1.3, 10.1.4, 10.1.5, or 10.1.6
-
Verify TLS/SSL certificate configurationAccess the IBM Storage Protect Plus admin console or configuration files and check whether server certificates for TLS/SSL communication are enabledAffected if TLS/SSL server certificates are configured and active
-
Locate certificate storage directoryConsult IBM Storage Protect Plus documentation for the default certificate storage path, commonly under the installation directory or a dedicated security folder, and list the certificate files presentAffected if Certificate files exist in the product's certificate directory
You are affected if IBM Storage Protect Plus version 10.1.0 through 10.1.6 is installed and TLS/SSL server certificates are in use, as the private keys for those certificates may have been disclosed.
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 · scopedRegenerate all certificates with new private keys, revoke the compromised certificates, and redeploy updated certificates to all dependent clients and servers. Review access logs and systems to determine the scope of key exposure.
IBM Storage Protect Plus version 10.1.7 or later
- 1. Identify all IBM Storage Protect Plus servers running versions 10.1.0 through 10.1.16
- 2. Plan maintenance window for upgrade procedure
- 3. Back up current configuration and any custom certificates
- 4. Upgrade IBM Storage Protect Plus to version 10.1.7 or later (the first release that addresses this vulnerability)
- 5. After upgrade, regenerate all server certificates - generate new private keys and certificate signing requests
- 6. Obtain new certificates from a trusted Certificate Authority
- 7. Deploy the new certificates to the Storage Protect Plus server
- 8. Revoke any certificates that may have been compromised
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-2024-27277 — 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-2024-27277 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