CVE-2024-56473
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 could allow an attacker to spoof their IP address, which is written to log files, due to improper verification of 'Client-IP' headers.
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 confidenceIBM Aspera Shares versions 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 PL6 does not properly validate the 'Client-IP' HTTP header, allowing attackers to spoof their source IP address which then gets recorded in application log files. This compromises log integrity and could mislead forensic investigations or bypass IP-based controls.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 installed IBM Aspera Shares versionRun the version command for Aspera Shares (such as 'aspera-shares --version' or check the product about page in the web UI) and compare it to the affected ranges: 1.9.0 through 1.10.0 PL6Affected if The installed version is 1.9.0, 1.9.x, 1.10.0, or any 1.10.0 PLx version up to and including PL6
-
Locate and inspect HTTP access logsFind the access log directory for Aspera Shares (commonly under the installation logs folder) and examine a recent log file for entries containing the 'Client-IP' HTTP header valueAffected if The logs show entries using the Client-IP header value rather than the actual TCP source IP
-
Verify IP validation configurationExamine Aspera Shares configuration files for any settings related to IP header validation, trust proxy settings, or Client-IP header handling (often in conf/ or config/ directories)Affected if There is no validation configured, or the configuration allows untrusted Client-IP headers to override the real source IP
-
Test Client-IP header injectionSend a test HTTP request to the Aspera Shares server with a forged Client-IP header (for example: 'curl -H "Client-IP: 192.168.1.100" http://target/') and verify whether the forged IP appears in the access logsAffected if The forged Client-IP value appears in the logs instead of the actual client IP address from the TCP connection
You are affected if your IBM Aspera Shares version is between 1.9.0 and 1.10.0 PL6 inclusive and the application logs the Client-IP HTTP header without validating it against the actual TCP source address.
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 data1.10.0
Upgrade to a version beyond 1.10.0 PL6 when available, or deploy a reverse proxy/WAF in front of Aspera Shares to validate and sanitize Client-IP headers against the actual TCP connection source.
- Consultation2.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-56473 — 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-2024-56473 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