CVE-2024-46902
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in Trend Micro Deep Discovery Inspector (DDI) versions 5.8 and above could allow an attacker to disclose sensitive information affected installations. Please note: an attacker must first obtain the ability to execute high-privileged code (admin user rights) on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability.
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 confidenceA high-severity information disclosure vulnerability in Trend Micro Deep Discovery Inspector (DDI) versions 5.8 and later allows authenticated admin users to access sensitive data that should not be visible to them. The flaw requires high-privileged (admin) access to exploit, suggesting it involves improper authorization or access control checks within the admin interface.
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>= 5.8, < 6.6= 6.6= 6.7CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 DDI installed versionAccess the DDI admin console or check system information to determine the running version of Trend Micro Deep Discovery Inspector. Compare this version number against the affected ranges: version 5.8 and later, including versions 6.6 and 6.7, up to but not including the patched version.Affected if The installed version is 5.8 or later through 6.7, meaning it falls within >= 5.8, < 6.6, = 6.6, or = 6.7.
-
Confirm admin interface accessibilityVerify whether the DDI web management interface is reachable from network segments. Check if the admin login page is exposed to untrusted networks or if it is restricted to trusted administrative workstations only.Affected if The admin interface is accessible from network locations where untrusted or non-administrative users could potentially obtain credentials.
-
Review admin user accountsAudit the list of configured administrator accounts in DDI. Identify all accounts with admin-level privileges and confirm which users legitimately require that access level.Affected if There are admin accounts assigned to users who do not require high-privileged access for their job function.
-
Examine authorization controls for sensitive dataLog in as a standard admin user (non-super-admin) and attempt to access areas of the admin interface that typically contain sensitive data such as logs, threat intelligence, or system configuration details. Observe whether access is improperly granted to data that should be restricted.Affected if Standard admin users can view sensitive data or system information that should be hidden from their privilege level.
-
Monitor admin activity for unauthorized data accessReview DDI audit logs or security logs for patterns where admin users access data outside their expected scope, particularly sensitive threat data, internal system details, or configuration information they should not normally retrieve.Affected if Audit logs show admin users accessing data categories they should not have permission to view.
A user is affected if their DDI version falls within 5.8 through 6.7 AND the admin interface is accessible to users with standard admin privileges, allowing them to view sensitive data beyond their authorized scope.
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 data6.6
Apply the vendor-supplied patch when available; until then, strictly limit admin access to trusted personnel, monitor administrative activity for anomalies, and consider network segmentation to reduce exposure of the DDI management interface.
- 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-2024-46902 — 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-2024-46902 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