CVE-2024-28767
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 · uneditedIBM Security Directory Integrator 7.2.0 through 7.2.0.13 and 10.0.0 through 10.0.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the system by sending a specially crafted request.
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 confidenceIBM Security Directory Integrator versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.0.13 and 10.0.0 through 10.0.3 contain a command injection vulnerability. A remote authenticated attacker can send specially crafted requests to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying system with the privileges of the SDI service account.
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>= 7.2.0, <= 7.2.0.13>= 10.0.0, <= 10.0.3CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 the installed IBM Security Directory Integrator versionLocate the version information for your IBM Security Directory Integrator installation (typically found in product documentation, installation directories, or via product-specific version commands). Compare this version number against the affected ranges: 7.2.0 through 7.2.0.13, or 10.0.0 through 10.0.3.Affected if The installed version falls within 7.2.0-7.2.0.13 or 10.0.0-10.0.3.
-
Verify network exposure of the TDI web interfacesDetermine whether any IBM Security Directory Integrator web interfaces, APIs, or connectors are accessible from untrusted networks. Review firewall rules, reverse proxy configurations, and network ACLs controlling access to TDI services.Affected if TDI web interfaces or APIs are exposed to untrusted or public networks without proper network-level access controls.
-
Assess authentication configuration for TDI endpointsReview the authentication settings for IBM Security Directory Integrator endpoints. Verify that all remote access points require valid authentication and that anonymous or default credentials are not enabled.Affected if Remote access to TDI does not require authentication, or uses weak/default credentials.
-
Check for unexpected processes or command executionReview running processes and system logs on the TDI server for signs of unauthorized command execution, unusual spawned processes, or commands originating from the TDI service account that were not expected.Affected if Unexpected processes are running or unusual commands appear in logs indicating potential exploitation.
Your environment is affected if the installed IBM Security Directory Integrator version is between 7.2.0-7.2.0.13 or 10.0.0-10.0.3 AND the TDI interfaces are network-accessible to authenticated attackers.
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 · scopedApply the IBM security patch or upgrade to a version beyond 7.2.0.13/10.0.3. Until patched, restrict network access to SDI management interfaces and monitor for suspicious authenticated requests.
For 7.2.x line: upgrade to 7.2.0.14 or later; For 10.0.x line: upgrade to 10.0.4 or later
- 1. Review IBM Security Directory Integrator (SDI) release notes and IBM Security bulletins for the specific fix to CVE-2024-28767
- 2. Plan upgrade during a maintenance window given this is a command injection vulnerability requiring authentication changes
- 3. Back up current SDI configuration, including config.xml, connectors, and any custom scripts
- 4. For SDI 7.2.x: Upgrade to version 7.2.0.14 or later (the next release after the last affected version 7.2.0.13)
- 5. For SDI 10.0.x: Upgrade to version 10.0.4 or later (the next release after the last affected version 10.0.3)
- 6. After upgrade, verify the system starts correctly and test critical integration flows
- 7. Review IBM PSIRT (Product Security Incident Response) for any additional post-upgrade configuration requirements
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,104.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-28767 — 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-2024-28767 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