VulnerabilityPublished 23 Oct 2024Updated 24 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-50382: botan · Observable Discrepancy

Affects botanSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium : upgrade to 3.6.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 45% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.6.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
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: 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: 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 23 Oct 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

Upgrade randombit/botan to 3.6.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubrandombit/botan`pkg:github/randombit/botan`Other threats	Affected <3.6.0	Fixed in 3.6.0

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-2024-50382, organizations should: 1) Upgrade Botan to version 3.6.0 or later, where the vulnerability is addressed. 2) Review and standardize build environments to avoid using LLVM 15 or other affected compiler versions that introduce secret-dependent branching, especially for RISC-V targets. 3) Employ compiler flags or code annotations that enforce constant-time operations and prevent compiler optimizations that introduce secret-dependent control flow. 4) Conduct side-channel analysis and testing on cryptographic implementations to detect unintended timing leaks. 5) For critical deployments, consider using alternative cryptographic libraries with verified constant-time implementations if upgrading Botan or changing compilers is not immediately feasible. 7) Implement network-level protections to limit exposure of vulnerable services to untrusted networks, reducing attack opportunities.

Description

Botan before 3.6.0, when certain LLVM versions are used, has compiler-induced secret-dependent control flow in lib/utils/ghash/ghash.cpp in GHASH in AES-GCM. There is a branch instead of an XOR with carry. This was observed for Clang in LLVM 15 on RISC-V.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-50382 is the potential exposure of cryptographic secrets due to timing side-channel leaks in AES-GCM operations. This can compromise the confidentiality of encrypted communications or data protected by Botan on affected platforms, particularly RISC-V systems compiled with vulnerable LLVM versions. While the vulnerability does not affect integrity or availability, leaking encryption keys or authentication tags can allow attackers to decrypt sensitive data or forge messages. The high attack complexity and lack of known exploits reduce immediate risk, but organizations relying on Botan for secure communications or data protection in critical systems may face significant confidentiality breaches if exploited. This is especially relevant for embedded systems, IoT devices, or infrastructure using RISC-V processors and LLVM toolchains. The vulnerability's network attack vector means remote attackers could attempt exploitation without local access, increasing the threat surface.

CWE-203Observable Discrepancy (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product behaves differently or sends different responses under different circumstances in a way that is observable to an unauthorized actor.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Implementation
Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Black Box Reverse Engineering (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 27 Feb 2026, 22:37 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-203

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats