CVE-2024-56471
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 · uneditedIBM Aspera Shares 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 PL6 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks.
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 confidenceIBM Aspera Shares versions 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 PL6 contains a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. An authenticated attacker can manipulate the application to send unauthorized requests from the server to internal or external resources, enabling network reconnaissance and potentially pivoting to internal services that should not be exposed.
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>= 1.9.0, < 1.10.0= 1.10.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Identify IBM Aspera Shares installationLocate the Aspera Shares installation directory or check for the aspera-shares process running on the system. Common locations include /opt/aspera/shares or the installation path configured during setup.Affected if IBM Aspera Shares is installed on the system
-
Determine installed versionRun the version check command provided by Aspera Shares, typically via the CLI tool (e.g., aspera-shares --version) or check the version file in the installation directory.Affected if The installed version cannot be determined or the version falls within 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 inclusive
-
Confirm version is within affected rangeCompare the identified version number against the affected range: versions 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 (including 1.9.x and 1.10.0).Affected if Installed version is 1.9.0, 1.9.x, or 1.10.0
-
Verify authentication is enabledCheck the authentication configuration settings in the Aspera Shares admin panel or configuration files to confirm user authentication is required for access.Affected if Authentication is disabled or not properly configured, making the SSRF exploitable by unauthenticated attackers
-
Identify exposed URL-handling featuresReview Aspera Shares configuration for features that accept user-supplied URLs, such as link generation, file transfer endpoints, or external resource references.Affected if URL-handling features are accessible to authenticated users without additional validation controls
If IBM Aspera Shares version 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 is installed and authentication is required for access, the environment is affected by this SSRF vulnerability.
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 · scoped1.10.0
Implement strict input validation on user-supplied URLs and restrict outbound network connections from the application server. Consider network segmentation to limit server-side request capabilities to trusted endpoints only.
IBM Aspera Shares 1.10.1 or later
- 1. Identify the current installed version of IBM Aspera Shares using the administrative console or command line interface
- 2. Navigate to the IBM Aspera Shares support or downloads page at www.ibm.com
- 3. Download the latest version of IBM Aspera Shares (version 1.10.1 or later)
- 4. Review the upgrade documentation and release notes for any specific upgrade procedures
- 5. Back up the existing Aspera Shares configuration and data directories
- 6. Stop the Aspera Shares service
- 7. Install the new version following the documented upgrade procedure
- 8. Verify the SSRF vulnerability is resolved by checking that internal network requests are no longer allowed from the application
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-56471 — 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-2024-56471 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