VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2025Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-10272: lunary-ai/lunary · Missing Authorization

Affects lunary-ai/lunarySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

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

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

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).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
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 20 Mar 2025
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 26 Oct 2026.

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

1. Immediately implement strict authorization checks on the /v1/datasets endpoint to ensure only authenticated and authorized users can access datasets. 2. If a patch is not yet available, deploy network-level access controls such as IP whitelisting or VPN requirements to restrict access to the API endpoint. 3. Conduct a thorough audit of dataset access logs to detect any unauthorized access attempts. 4. Employ API gateways or web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules to block unauthenticated requests to sensitive endpoints. 5. Review and enforce role-based access control (RBAC) policies within lunary-ai/lunary configurations. 6. Educate development and security teams about secure API design principles to prevent missing authorization flaws. 7. Monitor vendor communications for patches or updates and apply them promptly once available. 8. Consider data encryption at rest and in transit to add an additional layer of protection. 9. Perform regular penetration testing focused on access control mechanisms to detect similar issues early.

Description

lunary-ai/lunary is vulnerable to broken access control in the latest version. An attacker can view the content of any dataset without any kind of authorization by sending a GET request to the /v1/datasets endpoint without a valid authorization token.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive datasets managed by lunary-ai/lunary. This could include intellectual property, personal data subject to GDPR, or confidential business information. Exposure of such data can lead to regulatory penalties, loss of competitive advantage, reputational damage, and potential legal liabilities. Since the vulnerability requires no authentication and can be exploited remotely, attackers can easily access data from anywhere, increasing the risk of widespread data breaches. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, research, and government that rely on lunary-ai/lunary for data processing are particularly vulnerable. The breach of confidentiality could also undermine trust in AI-driven services and data platforms. Additionally, the lack of integrity or availability impact means the system remains operational but compromised in terms of data privacy. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive mitigation before active attacks emerge.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 13:12 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats