CVE-2024-30260VulnerabilityPublished 4 Apr 2024Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-30260: nodejs undici · Improper Authorization

Affects nodejs undiciSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.9 Low : upgrade to 5.28.4 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.9Low

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

EPSS: 0.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 54% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.28.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: 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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
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 4 Apr 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 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 nodejs undici to 5.28.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
nodejs undici	Affected <5.28.4	Fixed in 5.28.4

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading Undici to versions 5.28.4 or later, or 6.11.1 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Code audits should be conducted to identify usage of undici.request() and ensure that Authorization and Proxy-Authorization headers are not inadvertently reused or leaked. Implement strict input validation and header management policies within Node.js applications to prevent unauthorized header propagation. Employ runtime monitoring and logging to detect anomalous usage patterns of HTTP client libraries. In environments where upgrading is not immediately feasible, consider implementing network-level controls to restrict access to vulnerable services and enforce strict authentication and authorization policies. Additionally, educate developers about secure usage patterns of HTTP clients and the importance of consistent header handling. Regularly review dependencies and apply security patches promptly as part of a robust software supply chain management process.

Description

Undici is an HTTP/1.1 client, written from scratch for Node.js. Undici cleared Authorization and Proxy-Authorization headers for `fetch()`, but did not clear them for `undici.request()`. This vulnerability was patched in version(s) 5.28.4 and 6.11.1.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2024-30260 is generally low but non-negligible in environments where Undici is used extensively in Node.js applications, especially those handling sensitive data or operating in multi-tenant or cloud environments. Unauthorized retention of Authorization headers could lead to credential leakage or unauthorized access to backend services, potentially compromising confidentiality and integrity of data. This risk is heightened in complex microservices architectures or proxy setups where requests may be forwarded or reused improperly. Although the vulnerability requires high privileges and user interaction, insider threats or chained exploits could leverage this flaw to escalate access or exfiltrate sensitive information. The limited availability impact suggests service disruption is unlikely, but data exposure risks remain. European sectors such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure that rely on Node.js and Undici for backend services should be particularly vigilant. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the need for prompt remediation.

CWE-285Improper Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
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 you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply 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)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (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 4 Nov 2025, 17:08 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-285

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats