CVE-2024-58259
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 · uneditedA vulnerability has been identified within Rancher Manager in which it did not enforce request body size limits on certain public (unauthenticated) and authenticated API endpoints. This allows a malicious user to exploit this by sending excessively large payloads, which are fully loaded into memory during processing, leading to Denial of Service (DoS).
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 confidenceRancher Manager fails to enforce request body size limits on both public unauthenticated and authenticated API endpoints. An attacker can send excessively large payloads that are fully loaded into memory during processing, causing memory exhaustion and Denial of Service.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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.
-
Confirm Rancher Manager is installedCheck for Rancher Manager processes or look for its characteristic API ports (default 443/8443). Run 'kubectl get pods -n cattle-system' or check container runtime for 'rancher' images.Affected if Rancher Manager is present in the environment
-
Identify Rancher Manager versionCheck the Rancher version via the UI (top-left dropdown) or run 'kubectl get rancher -n cattle-system -o yaml' and look for the 'serverVersion' field. Alternatively, check the Helm chart: 'helm list -n cattle-system'.Affected if Any version of Rancher Manager is installed (no specific version range provided)
-
Verify if load balancer or reverse proxy has request body limitsInspect the configuration of any ingress controller, load balancer, or reverse proxy (such as Nginx, HAProxy, or cloud LB) sitting in front of Rancher. Look for directives like 'client_max_body_size' in Nginx or equivalent size limit settings.Affected if No body size limit is configured on the entry point
-
Check API endpoint exposureDetermine if the Rancher API (typically at /v3/ or /v1/ paths) is exposed to unauthenticated networks. Review network policies, firewall rules, and ingress configurations to confirm whether public-facing endpoints exist.Affected if API endpoints are exposed to public or untrusted networks without filtering
-
Inspect application-level size limitsReview Rancher configuration files, Helm values, or environment variables for any body size or request limit settings. Check if 'proxy-body-size' or similar parameters are set in ingress resources: 'kubectl get ingress -n cattle-system -o yaml'.Affected if No application-level body size limits are configured
The environment is affected if Rancher Manager is installed and neither load balancer nor application-level request body size limits are configured, particularly if API endpoints are exposed to unauthenticated access.
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 dataImplement request body size limits on all API endpoints, particularly at the load balancer or web server layer, and configure appropriate memory limits to prevent resource exhaustion from large payload requests.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-58259 — 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-2024-58259 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