VulnerabilityPublished 7 Aug 2024

CVE-2024-41432: Likeshop · Authentication Bypass by Spoofing

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Likeshop up to 2.5.7.20210811

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 7 Aug 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

To mitigate CVE-2024-41432, organizations should implement strict validation and filtering of HTTP headers that indicate client IP addresses, such as 'X-Forwarded-For' and 'Client-IP'. This includes configuring web servers and application firewalls to only accept these headers from trusted proxy IP addresses and ignoring or sanitizing them when received directly from clients. Deploying a whitelist approach for trusted proxies can prevent attackers from injecting spoofed headers. Additionally, Likeshop administrators should review and enhance account lockout policies to incorporate multi-factor authentication (MFA) for admin accounts, reducing reliance on IP-based controls. Monitoring and logging should be improved to detect anomalous IP address usage patterns and repeated failed login attempts. If possible, update Likeshop to a version that addresses this vulnerability once available or apply vendor-provided patches. Network segmentation and limiting administrative access to known, secure IP ranges can further reduce exposure. Finally, educating security teams about this specific threat will help in early detection and response.

Description

An IP Spoofing vulnerability has been discovered in Likeshop up to 2.5.7.20210811. This issue allows an attacker to replace their real IP address with any arbitrary IP address, specifically by adding a forged 'X-Forwarded' or 'Client-IP' header to requests. Exploiting IP spoofing, attackers can bypass account lockout mechanisms during attempts to log into admin accounts, spoof IP addresses in requests sent to the server, and impersonate IP addresses that have logged into user accounts, etc.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is on the integrity of the authentication and access control mechanisms within Likeshop-based systems. By spoofing IP addresses, attackers can bypass account lockout protections, increasing the risk of successful brute-force or credential stuffing attacks on administrative accounts. This can lead to unauthorized administrative access, data manipulation, or further compromise of the platform. Additionally, impersonating IP addresses of logged-in users may allow attackers to evade detection systems that rely on IP-based session validation or auditing, complicating incident response efforts. Although confidentiality and availability are not directly impacted, the integrity compromise can cascade into broader security breaches, including data tampering or unauthorized transactions. Organizations relying on Likeshop for e-commerce operations may face financial losses, reputational damage, and regulatory consequences if exploited. The lack of known exploits in the wild suggests the vulnerability is not yet actively weaponized, but the ease of exploitation and the critical nature of administrative access make timely mitigation essential.

CWE-290Authentication Bypass by Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Web Services API Signature Forgery Leveraging Hash Function Extension Weakness (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Misrepresentation (opens in a new tab)
Session Credential Falsification through Prediction (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

gitlab.com/c2at3/cve-2024-41432/-/blob/main/README.md (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 05:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-290

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats