VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jul 2024Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-32498: OpenStack Cinder · Exposed Files or Directories

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium · fixed in 29.0.3 : update OpenStack Cinder when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 15:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 57% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: OpenStack Cinder through 24.0.0
Patch: Available – fixed in 29.0.3, 28.0.2

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
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: 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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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 5 Jul 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

AI-suggested

1. 2. If you cannot patch yet, restrict access to image upload and conversion functionalities to trusted and minimal user sets, enforcing strict authentication and authorization controls. 3. Disable image conversion in Glance if not required, to reduce attack surface. 4. Implement rigorous monitoring and logging of image upload and processing activities to detect anomalous QCOW2 files or suspicious access patterns. 5. Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit access to OpenStack management interfaces. 6. Conduct regular audits of file access permissions and review exposed files on OpenStack servers to identify any inadvertent disclosures. 7. Educate administrators and users about the risks of uploading untrusted or crafted images. 8. Consider deploying runtime security tools that can detect unusual file access during image processing. These measures combined will reduce the likelihood and impact of exploitation.

Description

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Cinder through 24.0.0, Glance before 28.0.2, and Nova before 29.0.3. Arbitrary file access can occur via custom QCOW2 external data. By supplying a crafted QCOW2 image that references a specific data file path, an authenticated user may convince systems to return a copy of that file's contents from the server, resulting in unauthorized access to potentially sensitive data. All Cinder and Nova deployments are affected; only Glance deployments with image conversion enabled are affected.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2024-32498 can be substantial, especially for those operating private or public clouds using OpenStack. Unauthorized file disclosure could expose sensitive customer data, internal configuration files, credentials, or other critical information, leading to privacy violations, compliance breaches (e.g., GDPR), and potential lateral movement by attackers. Since OpenStack is widely used in European public sector, research institutions, and enterprises for cloud infrastructure, the risk extends to critical infrastructure and sensitive workloads. The requirement for authentication limits exposure to insiders or compromised accounts, but the ease of exploitation once authenticated increases risk. The lack of impact on integrity or availability means systems remain operational, but confidentiality breaches can undermine trust and lead to regulatory penalties. Organizations with image conversion enabled in Glance face additional risk. Overall, the vulnerability threatens confidentiality of data hosted on OpenStack clouds across Europe.

CWE-552Files or Directories Accessible to External Parties (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product makes files or directories accessible to unauthorized actors, even though they should not be.
Implementation · System Configuration · Operation
When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to disable public access.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V12.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Collect Data from Common Resource Locations (opens in a new tab)
Probe System 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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2025, 17:10 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-552

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats