CVE-2024-31409
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 · uneditedCertain MQTT wildcards are not blocked on the CyberPower PowerPanel system, which might result in an attacker obtaining data from throughout the system after gaining access to any device.
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 CyberPower PowerPanel MQTT implementation fails to restrict wildcard characters (+ and #) in topic subscriptions. These wildcards allow subscribers to receive messages from multiple topic levels, potentially enabling lateral movement where an attacker gaining access to one device can subscribe to topics system-wide and exfiltrate data from all connected devices.
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<= 4.9.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 installed PowerPanel versionLocate PowerPanel installation and identify the version number (typically via the application UI, installed programs list, or software inventory). Compare this version against the affected range: any version <= 4.9.0 is vulnerable.Affected if The installed version is 4.9.0 or lower.
-
Verify MQTT service is activeConfirm that the MQTT broker/service component of PowerPanel is enabled and running. Check process lists, service status, or application configuration for MQTT daemon presence.Affected if MQTT service is enabled and operational in the environment.
-
Inspect MQTT broker access control configurationExamine the MQTT broker configuration files (such as broker.conf, acl.conf, or similar) for Access Control List (ACL) rules that restrict or block topic subscriptions.Affected if No ACL rules exist, or ACLs allow wildcard characters (+ or #) in topic subscriptions.
-
Monitor for active wildcard topic subscriptionsUse MQTT client tools or broker logs to inspect currently active topic subscriptions. Look for subscriptions containing '+' (single-level wildcard) or '#' (multi-level wildcard) characters.Affected if Any active subscription uses + or # wildcards, indicating broad topic access.
If the PowerPanel version is 4.9.0 or lower AND MQTT is enabled, the environment is vulnerable to wildcard-based topic enumeration; check ACLs and active subscriptions to confirm exploitation feasibility.
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 broker-level access control to explicitly block or restrict wildcard topic subscriptions, enforce topic-level ACLs limiting subscriptions to device-specific namespaces only, and validate that subscribed topics do not contain wildcard characters.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-31409 — 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-2024-31409 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