CVE-2024-47081VulnerabilityPublished 9 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-47081: psf requests · Insufficiently Protected Credentials

Affects psf requestsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 2.32.4 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 61% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.32.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
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: 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: 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: 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: 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 9 Jun 2025
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 2026-10-25.

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 psf requests to 2.32.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
PyPIrequests`pkg:pypi/requests`Other threats	Affected <2.32.4	Fixed in 2.32.4

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

1. Immediate upgrade of the Requests library to version 2.32.4 or later is the most effective mitigation. 2. For legacy systems where upgrading is not feasible, explicitly disable .netrc credential usage by setting `trust_env=False` on the Requests Session object to prevent automatic credential inclusion. 3. Audit all codebases and automation scripts to identify usage of Requests with .netrc files and assess exposure to untrusted URLs. 4. Implement strict input validation and sanitization for any URLs processed by applications using Requests to reduce the risk of malicious URL injection. 5. Monitor network traffic for unusual outbound requests that could indicate credential leakage attempts. 6. Rotate any credentials stored in .netrc files that may have been exposed or are suspected to be at risk. 7. Educate developers and DevOps teams about the vulnerability and the importance of secure credential handling and library updates. 8. Consider alternative credential management approaches that do not rely on .netrc files, such as environment variables or secure vaults, to reduce attack surface.

Description

Requests is a HTTP library. Due to a URL parsing issue, Requests releases prior to 2.32.4 may leak .netrc credentials to third parties for specific maliciously-crafted URLs. Users should upgrade to version 2.32.4 to receive a fix. For older versions of Requests, use of the .netrc file can be disabled with `trust_env=False` on one's Requests Session.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2024-47081 can be significant in scenarios where Requests is used to automate HTTP requests with .netrc credentials. Leakage of these credentials could lead to unauthorized access to internal or external services, exposing sensitive data or enabling further lateral movement within networks. Confidentiality is the primary concern, as credentials may be exposed to attackers who can intercept or manipulate crafted URLs. This could compromise access to APIs, cloud services, or internal systems that rely on these credentials. The requirement for user interaction (e.g., clicking or triggering a malicious URL) somewhat limits the risk but does not eliminate it, especially in environments where automated processes handle URLs from untrusted sources. The vulnerability does not affect integrity or availability directly but can be a stepping stone for more severe attacks if credentials are reused or have broad access privileges. Organizations with automated workflows, DevOps pipelines, or integrations that use Requests and .netrc files should be particularly vigilant. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests the threat is currently theoretical but patching is critical to prevent future exploitation.

CWE-522Insufficiently Protected Credentials (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product transmits or stores authentication credentials, but it uses an insecure method that is susceptible to unauthorized interception and/or retrieval.
Architecture and Design
Use an appropriate security mechanism to protect the credentials.
Architecture and Design
Make appropriate use of cryptography to protect the credentials.
Implementation
Use industry standards to protect the credentials (e.g. LDAP, keystore, etc.).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.10.3 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Session Sidejacking (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Key Theft (opens in a new tab)
Password Recovery Exploitation (opens in a new tab)
Kerberoasting (opens in a new tab)
Modify Existing Service (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 10 Jul 2025, 22:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-522

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats