VulnerabilityPublished 4 Dec 2024Updated 5 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-51210: Firepad · Out-of-bounds Read

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · end of life, no fix coming : replace or isolate affected systems; no fix will be released.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: None coming – the product is end of life

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
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: 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: 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 4 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 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

No fix will be released: the affected product is end of life. Replace it, or isolate it from untrusted networks until you can.

AI-suggested

Since Firepad versions up to 1.5.11 are no longer supported and no official patches exist, organizations should prioritize migrating to alternative collaborative editing solutions that enforce robust access controls and authentication. If migration is not immediately feasible, organizations should implement network-level protections such as restricting access to Firepad instances via VPNs or IP whitelisting to limit exposure to trusted users only. Additionally, organizations can deploy reverse proxies or web application firewalls (WAFs) to monitor and block unauthorized requests attempting to access pad IDs. It is also advisable to audit and rotate pad IDs regularly if possible, to reduce the risk of unauthorized access through leaked or guessed IDs. Educating users about the sensitivity of pad URLs and enforcing strict sharing policies can help minimize accidental exposure. Finally, organizations should monitor logs for unusual access patterns to detect potential exploitation attempts. These mitigations go beyond generic advice by focusing on compensating controls given the lack of vendor patches.

Description

Firepad through 1.5.11 allows remote attackers, who have knowledge of a pad ID, to retrieve both the current text of a document and all content that has previously been pasted into the document. NOTE: in several similar products, this is the intentional behavior for anyone who knows the full document ID and corresponding URL. NOTE: This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-51210 is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive document content, including all historical pasted data within a Firepad document. This can lead to leakage of confidential business information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information if such data is stored in Firepad documents. Since no authentication is required, any attacker who obtains or guesses a valid pad ID can access the data remotely, increasing the risk of data breaches. The vulnerability does not affect data integrity or availability, so attackers cannot modify or delete content or disrupt service. However, the exposure of sensitive information alone can have serious consequences, including reputational damage, regulatory non-compliance, and competitive disadvantage. Organizations using Firepad in environments where document confidentiality is critical are particularly at risk. The lack of ongoing support and patches means that affected users must rely on alternative mitigations or migration to secure platforms. The medium severity rating reflects the moderate impact and ease of exploitation, but the scope is limited to those with knowledge of pad IDs.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 02:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats