CVE-2024-55582VulnerabilityPublished 9 Dec 2024Updated 11 Dec 2024

CVE-2024-55582: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.7 Medium · fixed in 6 : update affected systems when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.7Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 2% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 6

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

Attack Complexity: High
Attack Vector: Physical
Availability: None
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Privileges Required: None
Scope: Unchanged
User Interaction: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

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).
Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable component. Physical interaction may be brief or persistent.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.
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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted 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.
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.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 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 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-55582, organizations should prioritize encrypting Control Plane datastores to protect sensitive data at rest. This can be achieved by implementing strong encryption standards such as AES-256 for all control plane storage components. Network segmentation and strict access controls should be enforced to limit access to control plane systems only to trusted and authenticated entities. Monitoring and logging access to control plane datastores can help detect unauthorized attempts. Organizations should also track updates from Oxide vendors for patches or security advisories addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. Additionally, conducting regular security audits and penetration testing focused on control plane components can identify potential exposure. Employing multi-factor authentication and minimizing privileges for users and services interacting with the control plane further reduces risk. Finally, educating operational teams about the sensitivity of control plane data and secure handling practices is essential.

Description

Oxide before 6 has unencrypted Control Plane datastores.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-55582 is the exposure of sensitive control plane data to unauthorized parties, which can lead to significant confidentiality and integrity breaches. Attackers who exploit this vulnerability may gain access to configuration details, credentials, or operational commands, potentially allowing them to manipulate network or system behavior. This can result in unauthorized changes, data leakage, or preparation for further attacks such as lateral movement or privilege escalation. While availability is not directly impacted, the compromise of control plane data can indirectly disrupt services if attackers alter configurations or orchestrate malicious activities. Organizations with critical infrastructure, cloud environments, or network management relying on Oxide are at risk of operational disruption and data compromise. The medium severity and high attack complexity suggest that exploitation is not trivial but feasible for skilled attackers with some access, emphasizing the need for proactive mitigation.

CWE-312Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext within a resource that might be accessible to another control sphere.
Implementation · System Configuration · Operation
When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to encrypt the data at rest.
Implementation · System Configuration · Operation
In some systems/environments such as cloud, the use of "double encryption" (at both the software and hardware layer) might be required, and the developer might be solely responsible for both layers, instead of shared responsibility with the administrator of the broader system/environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (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)
Attack patterns
Retrieve Embedded Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

docs.oxide.computer/security/advisories/20240118-1 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 02:08 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-312

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats