VulnerabilityPublished 27 Dec 2024Updated 31 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-54454: Kurmi Provisioning Suite · Observable Discrepancy

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · fixed in 7.9.0.35 : update Kurmi Provisioning Suite when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:07 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Kurmi Provisioning Suite before 7.9.0.35
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.9.0.35

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 27 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

AI-suggested

In the absence of immediate patches, administrators should consider implementing rate limiting and monitoring on the sendPasswordReinitLink endpoint to detect and block automated username enumeration attempts. Additionally, modifying the application response to provide uniform messages regardless of username validity can prevent attackers from distinguishing valid accounts. Employing multi-factor authentication (MFA) reduces the risk of account compromise even if usernames are enumerated. Network-level protections such as web application firewalls (WAFs) can be configured to detect and block suspicious patterns targeting this endpoint. Regular security audits and user awareness training can further reduce the risk of exploitation stemming from username enumeration.

Description

An issue was discovered in Kurmi Provisioning Suite before 7.9.0.35, 7.10.x through 7.10.0.18, and 7.11.x through 7.11.0.15. An Observable Response Discrepancy vulnerability in the sendPasswordReinitLink action of the unlogged.do page allows remote attackers to test whether a username is valid or not. This allows confirmation of valid usernames.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-54454 is the disclosure of valid usernames within affected Kurmi Provisioning Suite deployments. While this does not directly compromise sensitive data or system integrity, it significantly aids attackers in crafting targeted attacks such as credential stuffing, brute force password attempts, or phishing campaigns. Organizations relying on Kurmi Provisioning Suite for telecommunication provisioning may face increased risk of account compromise if attackers combine this vulnerability with weak password policies or other vulnerabilities. The vulnerability does not cause denial of service or data modification but reduces the security posture by exposing user enumeration information. This can lead to subsequent attacks that may compromise confidentiality and integrity indirectly. The lack of required authentication or user interaction lowers the barrier to exploitation, increasing the likelihood of reconnaissance activities by malicious actors.

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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 03:21 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-203

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats