CVE-2021-38615VulnerabilityPublished 7 Sep 2021Updated 30 May 2025

CVE-2021-38615: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 60% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AC:L/AV:N/A:L/C:L/I:L/PR:L/S:U/UI:N

Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Vector: Network
Availability: Low
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
Scope: Unchanged
User Interaction: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 7 Sep 2021
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
n/a n/a	Affected =3.10.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately audit their use of Eigen NLP 3.10.1 and assess whether the vulnerable SSO endpoint is exposed and accessible to non-privileged users. Specific mitigation steps include: 1) Restrict access to the /auth/v1/sso/config/ endpoint strictly to trusted administrative users through network segmentation, firewall rules, or application-level access controls. 2) Implement robust authentication and authorization checks within the application to enforce role-based access control (RBAC) on sensitive endpoints. 3) Monitor logs for unusual access patterns or configuration changes related to SSO settings. 5) Conduct regular security reviews of identity and access management configurations to detect unauthorized changes. 6) Educate users about the risks of account compromise and enforce strong password policies and multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of unauthorized login. These targeted actions go beyond generic advice by focusing on the specific vulnerable endpoint and the critical nature of SSO configurations.

Description

In Eigen NLP 3.10.1, a lack of access control on the /auth/v1/sso/config/ SSO configuration endpoint allows any logged-in user (guest, standard, or admin) to view and modify information.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the security of identity and access management systems. SSO configurations are central to controlling user authentication and access across multiple enterprise applications. Unauthorized modification could allow attackers to redirect authentication requests, potentially enabling account takeover, privilege escalation, or unauthorized access to sensitive data. Confidentiality is at risk because attackers can view SSO configuration details, which might include identity provider endpoints, certificates, or tokens. Integrity is compromised as attackers can alter authentication flows, undermining trust in the authentication process. While availability is not directly affected, the indirect consequences of compromised authentication could lead to broader security incidents. European organizations that rely on Eigen NLP 3.10.1 for natural language processing integrated with SSO mechanisms should be particularly cautious. Given the medium severity and the requirement for authenticated access, the threat is more relevant in environments where user accounts are not tightly controlled or where guest or low-privilege accounts are common. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for targeted attacks, especially in sectors with high-value data or critical infrastructure.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jul 2025, 15:30 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats