CVE-2024-10275VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2025Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-10275: lunary-ai/lunary · Incorrect Authorization

Affects lunary-ai/lunarySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.3 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

7.3High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: 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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 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
GitHublunary-ai/lunary`pkg:github/lunary-ai/lunary`Other threats	Affected =1.5.5	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

1. Immediately audit all user permissions within lunary-ai/lunary to detect unauthorized billing permission assignments. 2. Enforce strict RBAC policies by restricting permission modification capabilities to 'owner' roles only, using custom access controls or external policy enforcement if the product lacks native support. 3. Monitor and log all permission changes with alerts for billing-related modifications. 4. Limit admin privileges to only those necessary and review admin roles regularly. 5. Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all admin accounts to reduce risk of credential compromise. 6. Coordinate with lunary-ai vendor for timely patch deployment once available. 7. Consider temporary compensating controls such as disabling billing permission changes or isolating billing management to separate trusted environments. 8. Train administrators on the risks of privilege escalation and proper permission management practices.

Description

In version 1.5.5 of lunary-ai/lunary, a vulnerability exists where admins, who do not have direct permissions to access billing resources, can change the permissions of existing users to include billing permissions. This can lead to a privilege escalation scenario where an administrator can manage billing, effectively bypassing the intended role-based access control. Only users with the 'owner' role should be allowed to invite members with billing permissions. This flaw allows admins to circumvent those restrictions, gaining unauthorized access and control over billing information, posing a risk to the organization’s financial resources.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized access and manipulation of billing information, potentially resulting in financial fraud, billing disputes, and loss of trust. Confidentiality of sensitive financial data is compromised, and integrity is at risk due to unauthorized permission changes. Although availability is not directly impacted, the financial and reputational damage could be significant, especially for organizations relying heavily on lunary-ai/lunary for billing and user management. Organizations in finance, technology, and sectors with strict compliance requirements (e.g., GDPR) face increased regulatory and operational risks. Attackers exploiting this flaw could cause unauthorized charges, disrupt billing processes, or leak sensitive financial data, leading to legal and compliance consequences.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

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

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats