CVE-2024-0690VulnerabilityPublished 6 Feb 2024Updated 6 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-0690: Log Injection

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.0 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable 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.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 6 Feb 2024
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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-0690, organizations should first upgrade ansible-core to a version where this vulnerability is patched once available. Until patches are released, administrators should avoid running tasks that handle sensitive data with loop items or ensure that sensitive variables are not exposed in logs. Implement strict access controls on log files and output directories to restrict visibility only to trusted administrators. Use alternative secret management solutions that do not rely on ansible-core logging mechanisms or encrypt logs at rest to reduce exposure risk. Additionally, review and audit ansible playbooks and roles to minimize the inclusion of sensitive information in task outputs. Employ runtime monitoring to detect unusual access to logs or attempts to extract sensitive data. Finally, educate users about the risk of interacting with vulnerable ansible tasks and enforce policies to limit user interaction where possible during automation runs.

Description

An information disclosure flaw was found in ansible-core due to a failure to respect the ANSIBLE_NO_LOG configuration in some scenarios. Information is still included in the output in certain tasks, such as loop items. Depending on the task, this issue may include sensitive information, such as decrypted secret values.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-0690 is the unintended disclosure of sensitive information such as decrypted secrets within ansible-core logs or output. This can lead to exposure of credentials, API keys, or other confidential data to users who have access to the logs but should not have visibility into such information. For organizations, this increases the risk of credential theft, unauthorized access to critical systems, and potential lateral movement within networks. While the vulnerability does not affect data integrity or system availability, the confidentiality breach can facilitate further attacks or data compromise. The requirement for local access and user interaction limits the ease of exploitation but does not eliminate risk, especially in multi-tenant or shared environments where users have limited privileges but can view logs. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate threat but organizations should not delay remediation due to the sensitive nature of the leaked data. Overall, the impact is moderate but significant in environments handling sensitive automation tasks.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…