CVE-2024-51558
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 · uneditedThis vulnerability exists in the Wave 2.0 due to missing restrictions for excessive failed authentication attempts on its API based login. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by conducting a brute force attack against legitimate user OTP, MPIN or password, which could lead to gain unauthorized access and compromise other user accounts.
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 · high confidenceThis is a classic authentication brute force vulnerability in Wave 2.0's API-based login system. The application lacks rate limiting, account lockout, or progressive delays for failed authentication attempts, allowing remote attackers to repeatedly guess user OTP, MPIN, or password credentials until they gain unauthorized access.
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< 120820241550< 1.1.7CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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 your installed 63moons productLocate the installed version of either 63moons Aero or 63moons Wave 2.0 in your system settings, about page, or installation directory. Common locations include the administration panel, version info file, or software inventory.Affected if The version is Aero < 120820241550 or Wave 2.0 < 1.1.7
-
Locate the API login endpointReview your application configuration or API documentation to identify the endpoint handling authentication requests. This is typically found in your API routes configuration, reverse proxy settings, or application gateway logs.Affected if The API login endpoint is exposed and accessible externally without additional authentication barriers
-
Verify rate limiting configurationInspect your web server, API gateway, or application firewall configuration for rate limiting rules on the login endpoint. Check whether any throttling, request limiting, or traffic shaping is applied to authentication endpoints.Affected if No rate limiting rules are configured for failed login attempts, or limits are set excessively high (e.g., hundreds of attempts per hour)
-
Confirm account lockout policy statusExamine the user authentication settings, security policies, or identity management configuration to determine if account lockout after failed attempts is enabled and configured.Affected if Account lockout is disabled or not configured for repeated failed authentication attempts
-
Check for progressive delaysReview application logs or test the login endpoint with invalid credentials multiple times to observe if the system introduces increasing delays between failed attempts.Affected if Failed login attempts are processed immediately without any time delay, or delays remain constant regardless of attempt frequency
Your environment is affected if you are running Aero < 120820241550 or Wave 2.0 < 1.1.7 AND the API login endpoint is accessible without rate limiting, account lockout, or progressive delays configured.
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 · scoped1.1.7120820241550
Implement account lockout policies after a configurable number of failed attempts, add rate limiting with progressive delays between failed login attempts, and consider CAPTCHA or IP-based blocking for repeated failures.
Aero: 120820241550 or later; Wave 2.0: 1.1.7 or later
- 1. Identify which product (Aero or Wave 2.0) is currently deployed in your environment.
- 2. Check the currently installed version of the product.
- 3. For Aero users: Upgrade to version 120820241550 or later.
- 4. For Wave 2.0 users: Upgrade to version 1.1.7 or later.
- 5. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the new version number.
- 6. Test authentication functionality to confirm the system is operational after upgrade.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-51558 — 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-2024-51558 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