VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jan 2024Updated 3 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-21638: Azure ipam · Improper Privilege Management

Affects Azure ipamSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical : upgrade to 3.0.0 as a priority.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 1.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 76% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.0.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
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: 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: 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 10 Jan 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 azure/ipam to 3.0.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubazure/ipam`pkg:github/azure/ipam`Other threats	Affected <3.0.0	Fixed in 3.0.0

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately verify the version of Azure IPAM deployed and upgrade to version 3.0.0 or later, where the vulnerability has been patched. Beyond patching, organizations should implement strict monitoring and auditing of Azure IPAM access logs to detect any anomalous authentication token usage or privilege escalation attempts. Employing Azure's native security features such as Azure AD Conditional Access policies, multi-factor authentication (MFA), and just-in-time (JIT) access can further reduce the risk of unauthorized access. Additionally, organizations should review and minimize the scope of permissions assigned to service principals and ensure that the principle of least privilege is enforced across all Azure resources. Regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on Azure identity and access management configurations can help identify residual risks. Finally, organizations should maintain an incident response plan tailored to cloud privilege escalation scenarios to enable rapid containment and remediation if exploitation is detected.

Description

Azure IPAM (IP Address Management) is a lightweight solution developed on top of the Azure platform designed to help Azure customers manage their IP Address space easily and effectively. By design there is no write access to customers' Azure environments as the Service Principal used is only assigned the Reader role at the root Management Group level. Until recently, the solution lacked the validation of the passed in authentication token which may result in attacker impersonating any privileged user to access data stored within the IPAM instance and subsequently from Azure, causing an elevation of privilege. This vulnerability has been patched in version 3.0.0.

Impact

For European organizations leveraging Azure IPAM for IP address management, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to impersonate privileged users and access sensitive network configuration data and other confidential information stored within Azure IPAM and potentially other Azure resources. This could lead to unauthorized disclosure of internal network topology, IP allocations, and other critical infrastructure details, facilitating further targeted attacks or lateral movement within the cloud environment. The elevation of privilege risk could also enable attackers to manipulate or exfiltrate data beyond the IPAM service, undermining the confidentiality and integrity of organizational assets. Given the criticality of the vulnerability and the widespread adoption of Azure services across Europe, the potential impact includes data breaches, compliance violations (e.g., GDPR), operational disruptions, and reputational damage. Organizations with complex Azure deployments or those in regulated sectors such as finance, healthcare, and government are particularly at risk due to the sensitivity of their data and the potential regulatory consequences of a breach.

CWE-269Improper Privilege Management (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Restful Privilege Elevation (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Abuse (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Escalation (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 3 Jul 2025, 22:56 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-269

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats