VulnerabilityPublished 14 Aug 2024Updated 7 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-42434: Zoom Workplace Apps, SDKs, Rooms Clients, and Rooms Controllers · Missing Authorization

Affects Zoom Workplace Apps, SDKs, Rooms Clients, and Rooms ControllersSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:07 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 41% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
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: 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: 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 14 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

Organizations should monitor Zoom’s official security advisories and apply patches or updates as soon as they become available to address CVE-2024-42434. In the interim, restrict network access to Zoom Workplace Apps, SDKs, Rooms Clients, and Rooms Controllers to trusted and authorized users only, employing network segmentation and zero-trust principles. Review and enforce strict privilege management policies to ensure that only necessary users have elevated privileges within Zoom environments. Conduct regular audits of user permissions and network traffic to detect anomalous access patterns. Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of privilege escalation. Additionally, consider deploying network-level controls such as firewalls and intrusion detection systems to monitor and block unauthorized access attempts. Educate privileged users about the risks of misuse and the importance of adhering to security policies. Finally, prepare incident response plans that include procedures for handling potential data disclosures related to this vulnerability.

Description

Missing authorization in some Zoom Workplace Apps, SDKs, Rooms Clients, and Rooms Controllers may allow a privileged user to conduct an information disclosure via network access.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2024-42434 is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information within Zoom’s collaboration environment. This can lead to confidentiality breaches affecting corporate secrets, personal data, or strategic communications. Sectors such as finance, government, healthcare, and critical infrastructure that rely extensively on Zoom for secure communications are particularly at risk. The requirement for high privileges limits the threat to insiders or compromised accounts with elevated access, but the network-based nature of the attack vector means that lateral movement within a compromised network could facilitate exploitation. Loss of confidentiality could result in regulatory penalties under GDPR, reputational damage, and potential competitive disadvantage. Since integrity and availability are not impacted, operational disruption is unlikely, but the exposure of sensitive data alone can have severe consequences. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially if attackers develop exploit techniques targeting this flaw.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
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 access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied 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
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

zoom.com/en/trust/security-bulletin/zsb-24030 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Oct 2025, 05:22 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats