Aspera FaspexApplication · Ibm

CVE-2024-45098

HIGH · 8.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-09-05
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 5.0.10 or later.
See remediation →
87/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
IBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.0 through 5.0.9 could allow a user to bypass intended access restrictions and conduct resource modification.

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 confidence

IBM Aspera Faspex versions 5.0.0 through 5.0.9 contain an access control bypass vulnerability that allows authenticated users to modify resources they should not have permission to alter. The vulnerability enables unauthorized resource modification by circumventing built-in access restrictions in the application's authorization mechanism.

MitigationUpgrade IBM Aspera Faspex to version 5.0.10 or later to obtain the security patch. Verify that access controls are functioning correctly after the upgrade.

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
Aspera FaspexApplication
Affected:>= 5.0.0, < 5.0.10

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine installed Faspex version
    Locate and read the version information for IBM Aspera Faspex - typically found in the application admin interface under 'About' or 'System Information', or check installation logs and package metadata
    Affected if The displayed version falls between 5.0.0 and 5.0.9 inclusive
  2. Verify authorization configuration
    Review the access control settings in the Faspex admin panel - check user permissions, resource sharing rules, and role assignments to confirm the authorization mechanism is enforcing intended restrictions
    Affected if Users with limited permissions can access or modify resources outside their authorized scope, indicating the bypass is present
  3. Compare against vulnerability scope
    Confirm the exact version number of your IBM Aspera Faspex installation against the affected range
    Affected if The installed version is 5.0.0, 5.0.1, 5.0.2, 5.0.3, 5.0.4, 5.0.5, 5.0.6, 5.0.7, 5.0.8, or 5.0.9

You are affected if your IBM Aspera Faspex version is 5.0.0 through 5.0.9 and you have users with restricted permissions who may be able to access or modify resources beyond their authorized scope.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 5.0.10 or later
Fixed in 5.0.10
Interim mitigation

Upgrade IBM Aspera Faspex to version 5.0.10 or later to obtain the security patch. Verify that access controls are functioning correctly after the upgrade.

Recommended fix High confidence

Aspera Faspex 5.0.10 or later

  1. Back up all Faspex data, configuration files, and database before upgrading
  2. Download IBM Aspera Faspex version 5.0.10 or later from the official IBM/Aspera download portal
  3. Stop the Faspex services to ensure a clean upgrade process
  4. Install the upgrade following IBM's standard Faspex upgrade documentation
  5. Restart Faspex services after successful installation
  6. Verify the version upgrade was successful by checking the Faspex admin interface or command line
  7. Confirm that the access restriction bypass vulnerability is resolved by testing resource modification permissions
Caveat Review IBM's release notes for 5.0.10 for any configuration or feature changes that may require adjustment

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Aspera Faspex Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
24.0 hours of engineering $4,160
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-45098 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-45098 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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