CVE-2024-28087
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 · uneditedIn Bonitasoft runtime Community edition, the lack of dynamic permissions causes IDOR vulnerability. Dynamic permissions existed only in Subscription edition and have now been restored in Community edition, where they are not custmizable.
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 confidenceIn Bonitasoft runtime Community edition, an IDOR vulnerability exists due to lack of dynamic permission controls. The dynamic permissions feature, previously only available in the Subscription edition, has been restored in the Community edition but remains non-customizable, allowing unauthorized access to or modification of resources belonging to other users through direct object references.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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.
-
Confirm Bonitasoft Community edition is in useIdentify the installed Bonitasoft edition type (Community vs Subscription) in your deployment documentation or system informationAffected if The deployment is using the Community edition of Bonitasoft runtime
-
Locate the dynamic permissions configurationAccess the Bonitasoft admin console or configuration files where dynamic permissions settings are managed for the Community editionAffected if Dynamic permissions settings are accessible and currently in a non-customizable state
-
Verify dynamic permissions are enabledCheck whether the dynamic permissions feature is turned on in the Community edition deployment settingsAffected if Dynamic permissions are enabled but remain non-customizable, limiting enforcement flexibility
-
Test for unauthorized resource accessUsing a standard user account, attempt to access or modify a resource (such as a process, case, or data object) belonging to a different user by using a direct object reference (e.g., modifying an ID parameter in an API request or URL)Affected if The request succeeds and returns or modifies data belonging to another user, indicating the IDOR vulnerability is present
-
Compare installed version to affected release timelineIdentify the exact Bonitasoft Community edition version number from the runtime installation and compare it against the version range containing the fix for CVE-2024-28087Affected if The installed version predates the patched release that addresses the dynamic permission control weakness
You are affected if you run Bonitasoft Community edition with dynamic permissions enabled but still vulnerable to IDOR attacks allowing unauthorized access to other users' resources via direct object references.
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 dataEnable and verify that dynamic permissions are properly enforced in the Bonitasoft Community edition deployment to prevent unauthorized resource access. Review user role assignments and ensure the non-customizable dynamic permission controls adequately restrict access to sensitive resources.
- Consultation4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-28087 — 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-2024-28087 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