CVE-2024-30140
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 · uneditedHCL BigFix Compliance is affected by unvalidated redirects and forwards. The HOST header can be manipulated by an attacker and as a result, it can poison the web cache and provide back to users being served the page.
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 confidenceHCL BigFix Compliance contains an unvalidated redirect/forward vulnerability where the HTTP HOST header can be manipulated by attackers. This allows web cache poisoning, where malicious content can be injected into the cache and served to users, potentially redirecting them to attacker-controlled sites or exposing them to malicious content.
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= 2.0.11CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:L
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 HCL BigFix Compliance is installedLocate the BigFix Compliance installation by checking installed programs on Windows, or searching for the BigFix installation directory on Linux. Look for the 'BESCompliance' or similar product directories.Affected if The product is not installed - if not found, this CVE does not apply.
-
Identify the installed versionAccess the BigFix Compliance web console and navigate to the About or System Information page to view the product version. Alternatively, check the installation logs or version file in the product directory.Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.0.11 - this specific version is affected by the vulnerability.
-
Verify the web interface is accessibleConfirm that the BigFix Compliance web console is reachable over HTTP/HTTPS. Check if the web service is running and accessible from the network by attempting to reach the login page.Affected if The web interface is exposed - the vulnerability requires the web component to be accessible for HOST header manipulation and cache poisoning to occur.
-
Check for HTTP HOST header handlingSend a test HTTP request to the BigFix Compliance web interface with a manipulated HOST header (for example, using a tool like curl with an arbitrary hostname). Observe whether the application accepts and reflects the manipulated header in its responses or redirects.Affected if The application accepts and reflects the manipulated HOST header in redirects or cached responses, indicating it is vulnerable to the unvalidated redirect/forward flaw.
A system is affected if HCL BigFix Compliance version 2.0.11 is installed AND the web interface is accessible and accepts manipulated HOST headers.
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 dataImplement strict validation of the HOST header against an allowlist of permitted values, and use relative URLs instead of absolute URLs to prevent HOST header injection and cache poisoning attacks.
- Consultation3.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-30140 — 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-2024-30140 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