CVE-2024-38742
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 · uneditedExposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in MBE Worldwide S.P.A. MBE eShip allows Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs.This issue affects MBE eShip: from n/a through 2.1.2.
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 confidenceMBE eShip versions up to 2.1.2 contain an access control list (ACL) bypass vulnerability that allows unauthorized users to access sensitive functionality that should be restricted. The vulnerability stems from improper constraint of access control mechanisms, potentially exposing confidential data or administrative functions to unauthenticated or unauthorized actors.
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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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.
-
Identify installed MBE eShip versionCheck the application version information typically found in the software itself, about section, or installation metadata. Common locations include the main application interface, a /version endpoint, or installation logs.Affected if The installed version is 2.1.2 or lower (any version up to and including 2.1.2)
-
Verify access to sensitive endpoints without authenticationAttempt to access sensitive functionality such as administrative panels, user data interfaces, or configuration endpoints without providing valid credentials. Observe whether the system grants access or returns an authentication error.Affected if Sensitive functionality is accessible without authentication or authorization validation
-
Inspect access control configurationReview the application's access control settings, role definitions, and permission mappings. Look for any misconfigured ACL rules, missing role enforcement, or disabled access validation on protected resources.Affected if ACL validation is missing, disabled, or improperly configured for sensitive functions
-
Check for unauthorized access to confidential dataUsing an unauthenticated or low-privilege account, attempt to retrieve data that should be restricted to administrators or other privileged roles. Compare the returned data against what should be accessible based on the account's role.Affected if Confidential or privileged data is returned to unauthorized users
A user is affected if MBE eShip version is 2.1.2 or lower AND sensitive endpoints or data are accessible without proper authentication or authorization validation.
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 proper role-based access control (RBAC) and ensure all sensitive endpoints enforce ACL validation. Conduct a comprehensive access control audit to identify and remediate all unprotected functionality.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-38742 — 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-2024-38742 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