CVE-2024-5296
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 · uneditedD-Link D-View Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key Authentication Bypass Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass authentication on affected installations of D-Link D-View. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the TokenUtils class. The issue results from a hard-coded cryptographic key. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to bypass authentication on the system. Was ZDI-CAN-21991.
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 confidenceD-Link D-View contains a hard-coded cryptographic key in the TokenUtils class that allows remote attackers to bypass authentication entirely. Since the same static key is used for token generation/validation across all installations, an attacker can craft valid authentication tokens without knowing legitimate credentials.
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= 2.0.1.28CVSS 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:3.0/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 D-Link D-View installationLocate the D-Link D-View 8 installation directory or check running services for D-View componentsAffected if D-Link D-View 8 is installed and running
-
Verify installed versionCheck the D-View application version (typically via about dialog, installation directory metadata, or version file) and compare to 2.0.1.28Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.0.1.28
-
Locate TokenUtils classSearch for the TokenUtils class file within the D-View installation directory (common locations: WEB-INF/classes, lib, or source archives)Affected if TokenUtils class exists in the installation
-
Inspect TokenUtils for hardcoded keyOpen the TokenUtils source or decompiled class and search for hardcoded string literals used in token generation or validation (look for static String constants containing cryptographic key material)Affected if A static/hardcoded cryptographic key is found in the TokenUtils class used for token operations
-
Check token validation behaviorReview how tokens are generated and validated - verify if the same key is used across installations or if it varies per deploymentAffected if The same key is used universally rather than being unique per installation
You are affected if D-Link D-View 8 version 2.0.1.28 is running and the TokenUtils class contains a hardcoded cryptographic key used for all authentication tokens.
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 dataReplace the hard-coded cryptographic key with a securely generated, unique key per installation; implement proper secret management; verify the vendor has released a patch or consider upgrading to a supported version.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-5296 — 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-2024-5296 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