CVE-2024-34559
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 · uneditedInsertion of Sensitive Information into Log File vulnerability in Ghost Foundation Ghost.This issue affects Ghost: from n/a through 1.4.0.
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 confidenceAn insertion of sensitive information into log file vulnerability in Ghost CMS allows sensitive user data (potentially credentials, session tokens, or PII) to be written to application logs without sanitization, which could be exposed to unauthorized parties with access to those logs.
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
- 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.
-
Determine installed Ghost CMS versionRun `ghost version` in the Ghost installation directory, or check package.json for the 'ghost' version fieldAffected if The installed version is 1.4.0 or earlier
-
Verify Ghost logging is enabledCheck if logging is configured in config.development.json or config.production.json under the 'logging' key, or inspect if logs directory contains recent log filesAffected if Logging is enabled and writing to disk (this is the default behavior)
-
Inspect application logs for unsanitized sensitive dataExamine recent log files in the /content/logs/ directory or logs folder for patterns like plain-text passwords, session tokens, API keys, or PII such as email addressesAffected if Log files contain readable sensitive data such as credentials, tokens, or personal information without redaction
-
Check for log sanitization middlewareReview the Ghost source code or configuration for custom logging middleware that redacts sensitive fields before writing to logsAffected if No custom sanitization middleware exists and default logging behavior is in use
You are affected if Ghost CMS version 1.4.0 or earlier is installed with logging enabled and no log sanitization is implemented, resulting in sensitive data appearing in plain text in log files.
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 dataUpgrade Ghost beyond version 1.4.0 to receive the patch, or implement log sanitization middleware to redact sensitive data (credentials, tokens, API keys) before logging.
- Consultation2.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-34559 — 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-2024-34559 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