3scale Api Management PlatformApplication · Redhat
CVE-2024-9671
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 was found in 3Scale. There is no auth mechanism to see a PDF invoice of a Developer user if the URL is known. Anyone can see the invoice if the URL is known or guessed.
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 confidenceThis is a broken access control vulnerability in 3Scale where PDF invoices for Developer users can be accessed without any authentication. If an attacker knows or guesses the invoice URL, they can view the document directly without any authorization check, exposing potentially sensitive billing information.
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
3scale Api Management PlatformApplication
= 2.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if 3Scale is deployed in your environmentCheck for the presence of 3scale API Management components, such as by looking for '3scale' or 'apicast' in running containers, pod names, or installed packages.Affected if 3Scale is not installed in your environment.
-
Confirm the 3Scale version is 2.0Run '3scale version' or check the version field in the 3scale admin console, or inspect the image/tag version of the 3scale deployment.Affected if The installed version equals 2.0.
-
Check if Developer accounts existLog into the 3scale admin panel and verify if Developer accounts have been created in the Developer Portal, or query the accounts table for 'developer' type accounts.Affected if Developer accounts exist and have active subscriptions.
-
Verify if invoice generation is enabledCheck the 3scale billing settings in the admin panel to confirm that invoice generation is turned on for developer accounts.Affected if Invoice generation is enabled for developer accounts.
-
Test unauthenticated invoice URL accessLocate a known invoice URL pattern (such as /invoices/{id}.pdf) and attempt to access it in a browser or via curl without providing any authentication credentials.Affected if The invoice PDF loads successfully without any login or authorization token.
You are affected if 3Scale version 2.0 is running with Developer accounts that have invoices generated, and the invoice PDF URLs are accessible without authentication.
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 proper authentication and authorization checks on invoice serving endpoints to verify the requester has legitimate access to the specific invoice before returning the PDF.
Fix this in 3scale Api Management Platform
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-9671 — 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-2024-9671 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