CVE-2024-52043
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 · uneditedGeneration of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information in HumHub GmbH & Co. KG - HumHub on Linux allows: Excavation (user enumeration).This issue affects all released HumHub versions: through 1.16.2.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in HumHub allows user enumeration through error messages. The application returns different responses for valid vs invalid usernames during authentication or user lookup operations, enabling attackers to discover valid user accounts. This information disclosure affects all HumHub versions through 1.16.2 on Linux.
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<= 1.16.2CVSS 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.
-
Check HumHub installation versionLocate the version file or admin panel version display. Typically found in the administration settings, or check the file system for version indicators in the HumHub installation directory.Affected if The installed version is 1.16.2 or lower on Linux.
-
Test login endpoint for user enumerationSubmit a login request with a known-valid username but wrong password, then submit the same request with a clearly invalid username. Compare the error messages or response behavior between the two attempts.Affected if The responses differ - for example, the valid username returns a password-related error while the invalid username returns a user-not-found error.
-
Test password reset or user lookup functionalityUse any password reset or user lookup feature that accepts a username as input. Submit requests with both valid and invalid usernames and observe the responses.Affected if Different error messages or response times indicate valid versus invalid accounts.
-
Inspect error message configurationReview the application configuration and language files for authentication-related error messages. Check if separate messages exist for 'user not found' versus 'incorrect password'.Affected if Distinct error messages exist for invalid usernames versus invalid passwords, or the application reveals account existence through responses.
A system is affected if it runs HumHub version 1.16.2 or lower and returns distinguishable responses that reveal whether a username is valid during authentication or lookup operations.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of HumHub beyond 1.16.2, or implement generic error messaging that returns identical responses for both valid and invalid usernames to prevent enumeration.
- 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-2024-52043 — 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-2024-52043 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