VulnerabilityPublished 14 Jan 2025Updated 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2024-13158: Ivanti Endpoint Manager · Untrusted Search Path

Affects Ivanti Endpoint ManagerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.2 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.2High

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

EPSS: 3.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 88% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: 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: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 Jan 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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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-2024-13158, organizations should immediately apply the 2024 January-2025 and 2022 SU6 January-2025 Security Updates released by Ivanti, which address the untrusted search path vulnerability. In addition to patching, organizations should audit and restrict administrative privileges to the minimum necessary, employing the principle of least privilege to reduce the risk of exploitation. Implementing robust endpoint protection and monitoring for unusual administrative activity can help detect potential exploitation attempts. Network segmentation and limiting remote administrative access to trusted networks or VPNs further reduce exposure. Organizations should also review Ivanti Endpoint Manager configurations to ensure no insecure search paths or environment variables can be manipulated by non-administrative users. Regularly updating and hardening the underlying operating systems and applying security best practices for privilege management will complement these efforts. Finally, maintaining an incident response plan that includes scenarios involving endpoint management compromise will improve readiness in case of exploitation.

Description

An unbounded resource search path in Ivanti EPM before the 2024 January-2025 Security Update and 2022 SU6 January-2025 Security Update allows a remote authenticated attacker with admin privileges to achieve remote code execution.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2024-13158 is substantial for organizations using Ivanti Endpoint Manager. Successful exploitation enables an attacker with administrative credentials to execute arbitrary code remotely, potentially leading to full system compromise. This can result in unauthorized access to sensitive data, disruption of endpoint management operations, and the deployment of further malware or ransomware. Given Ivanti Endpoint Manager's role in managing and securing endpoints across an enterprise, compromise could cascade to multiple systems, undermining overall network security. The vulnerability affects confidentiality, integrity, and availability, making it a critical risk for organizations that rely on Ivanti for endpoint control. Enterprises with large-scale deployments, managed service providers, and organizations in regulated industries face heightened risk due to the potential for data breaches and operational disruption. The requirement for admin privileges limits the attack surface but also highlights the importance of strict access controls. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk but does not diminish the urgency of remediation, as threat actors may develop exploits rapidly once the vulnerability is public.

CWE-426Untrusted Search Path (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product searches for critical resources using an externally-supplied search path that can point to resources that are not under the product's direct control.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Hard-code the search path to a set of known-safe values (such as system directories), or only allow them to be specified by the administrator in a configuration file. Do not allow these settings to be modified by an external party. Be careful to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-426 and CWE-428.
Implementation
When invoking other programs, specify those programs using fully-qualified pathnames. While this is an effective approach, code that uses fully-qualified pathnames might not be portable to other systems that do not use the same pathnames.
Implementation
Remove or restrict all environment settings before invoking other programs. This includes the PATH environment variable, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and other settings that identify the location of code libraries, and any application-specific search paths.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
Infrastructure as Code (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leveraging/Manipulating Configuration File Search Paths (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

forums.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-EPM-January-2025-for-EPM-2024-and-EPM-2022-SU6 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 21:45 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-426, CWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats