CVE-2024-22312VulnerabilityPublished 10 Feb 2024Updated 10 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-22312: IBM Storage Defender – Resiliency Service · Plaintext Storage of a Password

Affects IBM Storage Defender – Resiliency ServiceSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
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: 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: 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: 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 10 Feb 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 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
IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service	Affected =2.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should take several specific actions beyond generic advice: 1) Immediately audit and restrict local administrative and privileged access to systems running IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service to minimize the number of users who can access stored credentials. 2) Implement strict access controls and monitoring on the file system locations where credentials are stored to detect unauthorized access attempts. 3) Employ host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDS) or endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools to monitor for suspicious activities related to credential access or privilege escalation. 4) If possible, configure the application or environment to use alternative secure credential storage mechanisms such as encrypted vaults or hardware security modules (HSMs). 5) Engage with IBM support or security advisories to obtain patches or updates as they become available and plan for timely deployment. 6) Conduct regular security training and awareness for privileged users to reduce insider threat risks. 7) Consider network segmentation and isolation of systems running the vulnerable service to limit lateral movement in case of compromise.

Description

IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service 2.0 stores user credentials in plain clear text which can be read by a local user. IBM X-Force ID: 278748.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily in environments where IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service 2.0 is deployed. The plaintext storage of credentials can lead to credential theft by malicious insiders or attackers who have already gained elevated local access. This could facilitate unauthorized access to storage management functions, potentially leading to data exposure or manipulation of storage resiliency configurations. Although the vulnerability does not directly impact system integrity or availability, the confidentiality breach can have cascading effects, such as enabling further attacks or data breaches. Organizations in sectors with strict data protection regulations, such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, may face compliance risks if sensitive information is exposed due to this vulnerability. Additionally, the requirement for high privileges to exploit means that organizations should focus on limiting privileged access and monitoring for privilege escalation attempts. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially in targeted attacks or insider threat scenarios.

CWE-256Plaintext Storage of a Password (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product stores a password in plaintext within resources such as memory or files.
Architecture and Design
Avoid storing passwords in easily accessible locations.
Architecture and Design
Consider storing cryptographic hashes of passwords as an alternative to storing in plaintext.
A programmer might attempt to remedy the password management problem by obscuring the password with an encoding function, such as base 64 encoding, but this effort does not adequately protect the password because the encoding can be detected and decoded easily.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Forgot Password (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.7.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (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 11 Jul 2025, 21:48 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-256

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats