CVE-2024-5710VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jun 2024Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-5710: berriai/litellm · Missing Authorization

Affects berriai/litellmSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
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: 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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
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.
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 Jun 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubberriai/litellm`pkg:github/berriai/litellm`Other threats	Affected =1.34.34	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

1. Monitor berriai/litellm vendor communications closely for official patches or updates addressing CVE-2024-5710 and apply them promptly. 2. Until patches are available, restrict access to team management endpoints to trusted administrators only, using network segmentation, firewall rules, or API gateways. 3. Implement strict role-based access controls (RBAC) within the application to limit team management capabilities to authorized personnel. 4. Conduct regular audits of team membership and management logs to detect unauthorized changes or suspicious activities. 5. Employ anomaly detection tools to flag unusual team creation, deletion, or membership modifications. 6. Educate administrators and users about the risks of privilege escalation and enforce the principle of least privilege. 7. If possible, disable or limit team management features temporarily in high-risk environments. 8. Integrate multi-factor authentication (MFA) for accounts with team management privileges to reduce risk of credential compromise. 9. Prepare incident response plans specific to unauthorized access or manipulation of team structures.

Description

berriai/litellm version 1.34.34 is vulnerable to improper access control in its team management functionality. This vulnerability allows attackers to perform unauthorized actions such as creating, updating, viewing, deleting, blocking, and unblocking any teams, as well as adding or deleting any member to or from any teams. The vulnerability stems from insufficient access control checks in various team management endpoints, enabling attackers to exploit these functionalities without proper authorization.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the integrity of team management within berriai/litellm deployments. Unauthorized manipulation of teams and memberships can lead to disruption of collaboration, unauthorized access to sensitive projects, and potential insider threats if attackers add malicious actors to critical teams. This could affect sectors relying heavily on team-based workflows such as technology, finance, government, and research institutions. The lack of confidentiality and availability impact reduces the risk of data leakage or denial of service, but the integrity compromise could facilitate further attacks or data manipulation. Organizations with regulatory compliance requirements around access control and data integrity (e.g., GDPR, NIS2 Directive) may face compliance risks if this vulnerability is exploited. The medium severity rating suggests prioritization but not emergency response unless combined with other vulnerabilities or active exploitation.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

huntr.com/bounties/70897f59-a966-4d93-b71e-745e3da91970 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 13:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats