CVE-2024-47212
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Iglu Server 0.13.0 and below. It involves sending very large payloads to a particular API endpoint of Iglu Server and can render it completely unresponsive. If the operation of Iglu Server is not restored, event processing in the pipeline would eventually halt.
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 confidenceIglu Server 0.13.0 and below contains a Denial of Service vulnerability where sending excessively large payloads to a specific API endpoint causes complete service unresponsiveness. This appears to be a resource exhaustion issue likely due to missing input validation or payload size limits on the affected endpoint.
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< 0.13.1CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Determine Iglu Server versionCheck the running Iglu Server version by querying the /health or /info API endpoint, or check the package/docker image version if self-hostedAffected if Installed version is below 0.13.1 (any version 0.13.0 or lower)
-
Identify API endpoint exposureReview the Iglu Server configuration to identify which API endpoints are exposed and accessible from untrusted networksAffected if The API endpoints are externally accessible without network restrictions
-
Check for payload size limitsInspect Iglu Server configuration files (typically application.conf or application.yml) for any settings related to request body size limits, such as parsers, play.http.parser.maxDiskLength, or similar payload size configurationsAffected if No explicit payload size limits are defined, or limits are set to excessively large values
-
Verify input validation controlsCheck if there are any input validation or sanitization mechanisms in place for API request handlingAffected if No input validation or size restrictions are configured on the API layer
A user is affected if they are running Iglu Server version 0.13.0 or below with exposed API endpoints and no configured payload size limits.
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.
dbcve · scoped0.13.1
Implement strict payload size limits and validation on the vulnerable API endpoint, along with appropriate timeout and resource consumption controls to prevent service exhaustion from large request payloads.
0.13.1
- Upgrade Iglu Server to version 0.13.1 or later
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the Iglu Server version
- Test that the API endpoints are responsive with normal payload sizes
- Monitor server resource usage to confirm the resource consumption issue is resolved
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47212 — 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-2024-47212 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