VulnerabilityPublished 18 Dec 2024Updated 20 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-49201: remote-file-orchestrator · Insecure Storage of Sensitive Information

Affects remote-file-orchestratorSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 2.8.1 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.8.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: 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 18 Dec 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 keyfactor/remote-file-orchestrator to 2.8.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubkeyfactor/remote-file-orchestrator`pkg:github/keyfactor/remote-file-orchestrator`Other threats	Affected >=2.8 <2.8.1	Fixed in 2.8.1

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-49201, organizations should take the following specific actions: 1) Upgrade Keyfactor Remote File Orchestrator to version 2.8.1 or later as soon as the patch is available to eliminate the vulnerability. 2) Until a patch is applied, disable or restrict debug-level logging in production environments to prevent sensitive data from being recorded in logs. 3) Implement strict access controls and monitoring on log files to detect unauthorized access or exfiltration attempts. 4) Conduct regular audits of logging configurations to ensure no sensitive information is inadvertently exposed. 5) Network segmentation should be used to limit access to the RFO management interfaces, reducing the attack surface. 6) Employ intrusion detection systems to monitor for unusual access patterns that could indicate exploitation attempts. 7) Educate administrators about the risks of enabling verbose logging in sensitive environments and enforce policies to limit debug logging to trusted test or development systems only.

Description

Keyfactor Remote File Orchestrator (aka remote-file-orchestrator) 2.8 before 2.8.1 allows Information Disclosure: sensitive information could be exposed at the debug logging level.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-49201 is the potential exposure of sensitive information, which could include credentials, configuration parameters, or internal system details. This leakage can aid attackers in planning more targeted attacks, such as privilege escalation or lateral movement within a network. Although the vulnerability does not directly compromise system integrity or availability, the confidentiality breach can undermine organizational security postures, especially in environments where Keyfactor RFO is used to manage critical certificate infrastructures. Organizations relying on this software for secure file orchestration and certificate management may face increased risk of data exposure and subsequent exploitation. The medium severity rating reflects that while the vulnerability is relatively easy to exploit, the impact is limited to information disclosure without immediate system disruption.

CWE-922Insecure Storage of Sensitive Information (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product stores sensitive information without properly limiting read or write access by unauthorized actors.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.1.6 (opens in a new tab)
V8.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V8.2.2 (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 26 Feb 2026, 00:23 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-922

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats