VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2024Updated 16 Dec 2025

CVE-2024-1801: Progress Software Telerik Reporting · Deserialization of Untrusted Data

Affects Progress Software Telerik ReportingSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 18.0.24.130 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:54 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 18.0.24.130

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

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

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: 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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: 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.
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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Mar 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 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

Upgrade telerik.reporting to 18.0.24.130.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
NuGettelerik.reporting`pkg:nuget/telerik.reporting`Other threats	Affected <18.0.24.130	Fixed in 18.0.24.130

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

AI-suggested

1. 2. If you cannot patch yet, restrict local access to systems running Telerik Reporting to trusted users only, employing strict access controls and monitoring. 3. Implement application whitelisting and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect and block suspicious deserialization activities or code execution attempts. 4. Conduct regular audits of user privileges and remove unnecessary local access rights to minimize the attack surface. 5. Use network segmentation to isolate reporting servers from less trusted network zones, limiting lateral movement opportunities. 6. Educate users about the risks of executing untrusted files or interacting with suspicious prompts that could trigger deserialization exploits. 7. Monitor logs and system behavior for anomalies indicative of exploitation attempts, such as unexpected process launches or serialized data handling. 8. Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or similar technologies that can detect and prevent insecure deserialization at runtime.

Description

In Progress® Telerik® Reporting versions prior to 2024 Q1 (18.0.24.130), a code execution attack is possible by a local threat actor through an insecure deserialization vulnerability.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2024-1801 can be substantial, especially for enterprises relying on Telerik Reporting for business intelligence and reporting. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized code execution on systems running the vulnerable software, potentially exposing sensitive corporate data and intellectual property. The confidentiality impact is high, risking data leaks, while integrity and availability impacts are lower but still present. Given the local attack vector, the threat is more pronounced in environments where internal users or attackers can gain local access, such as through compromised credentials or insider threats. This vulnerability could facilitate lateral movement within networks, increasing the risk of broader compromise. The lack of known exploits in the wild provides a window for proactive defense, but the high CVSS score indicates that once exploited, the consequences could be severe. European organizations with strict data protection regulations (e.g., GDPR) must consider the legal and reputational risks of data breaches stemming from this vulnerability.

CWE-502Deserialization of Untrusted Data (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #15OWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
Implementation
When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe.
Implementation
Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Object Injection (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 23 Dec 2025, 17:11 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-502

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats