Storage Defender Resiliency ServiceApplication · Ibm

CVE-2024-52361

MEDIUM · 5.7 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-12-18
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 2.0.9 or later.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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 Storage Defender - Resiliency Service 2.0.0 through 2.0.9  stores user credentials in plain text which can be read by an authenticated user with access to the pod.

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 confidence

IBM Storage Defender Resiliency Service versions 2.0.0-2.0.9 stores user credentials in plain text within the pod, allowing any authenticated user with pod access to read sensitive credentials. This is a storage vulnerability where sensitive authentication data is not encrypted or protected.

MitigationRestrict pod access to authorized personnel only. Apply the vendor patch when available and rotate all potentially exposed credentials. Consider implementing Kubernetes Secrets or a vault solution for credential storage.

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
Storage Defender Resiliency ServiceApplication
Affected:>= 2.0, <= 2.0.9

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
Adjacent
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

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

  1. Check the installed version of IBM Storage Defender Resiliency Service
    Run 'kubectl get pods -n <namespace>' to find pods with names containing 'storage-defender' or 'resiliency'. Then run 'kubectl describe pod <pod-name> -n <namespace>' to view the image version tag. Compare this version against the affected range 2.0.0 to 2.0.9.
    Affected if The installed version falls within 2.0.0 through 2.0.9 inclusive
  2. Examine environment variables for plain text credentials
    Run 'kubectl describe pod <pod-name> -n <namespace>' and review the Environment section. Also run 'kubectl exec <pod-name> -n <namespace> -- env' to list all environment variables. Look for any variables containing password, token, secret, key, or auth in their names with unencrypted values.
    Affected if Environment variables contain plain text credentials such as passwords, API keys, or authentication tokens
  3. Inspect configmaps for plain text credentials
    Run 'kubectl get configmap -n <namespace>' to list all configmaps in the namespace. Run 'kubectl get configmap <configmap-name> -n <namespace> -o yaml' to inspect each configmap. Look for any configuration data containing unencrypted credentials.
    Affected if Configmaps contain plain text user credentials or authentication data
  4. Check pod filesystem for credential files
    Run 'kubectl exec -it <pod-name> -n <namespace> -- find / -type f -name "*.conf" -o -name "*.json" -o -name "*.yaml" -o -name "*.yml" 2>/dev/null' to locate configuration files. Then inspect likely locations such as /app/config, /config, or application data directories for files containing plain text passwords or credentials.
    Affected if Configuration or credential files within the pod contain unencrypted passwords or authentication data

You are affected if IBM Storage Defender Resiliency Service version 2.0.0-2.0.9 is deployed AND plain text credentials are found in pod environment variables, configmaps, or configuration files.

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.

From vendor data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 2.0.9
Interim mitigation

Restrict pod access to authorized personnel only. Apply the vendor patch when available and rotate all potentially exposed credentials. Consider implementing Kubernetes Secrets or a vault solution for credential storage.

Fix this in Storage Defender Resiliency Service Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,180
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-52361 — 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-2024-52361 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