VulnerabilityPublished 13 Jan 2025Updated 16 Jan 2025

CVE-2024-57811: Eaton X303 · Use of Hard-coded Credentials

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical · end of life, no fix coming : replace or isolate affected systems; no fix will be released.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 38% 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:N/I:H/A:H

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

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: 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: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 Jan 2025
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 no patches or firmware updates are available for the affected Eaton XC-303 PLC versions, organizations must implement compensating controls to mitigate risk. First, immediately identify and inventory all affected PLCs within the network. Restrict network access to these devices by implementing strict network segmentation and firewall rules, allowing SSH access only from trusted management stations or isolated networks. Disable or block SSH access if it is not essential for operations. Employ network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) to monitor for suspicious SSH login attempts or unusual traffic patterns targeting PLCs. Consider deploying jump servers or bastion hosts with multi-factor authentication to control administrative access. If feasible, replace affected PLCs with updated or alternative devices that do not contain hardcoded credentials. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focused on OT environments to detect potential exploitation attempts. Finally, develop and rehearse incident response plans specific to OT systems to quickly contain and remediate any compromise involving these PLCs.

Description

In Eaton X303 3.5.16 - X303 3.5.17 Build 712, an attacker with network access to a XC-303 PLC can login as root over SSH. The root password is hardcoded in the firmware. NOTE: This vulnerability appears in versions that are no longer supported by Eaton.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2024-57811 is severe for organizations relying on Eaton XC-303 PLCs in their industrial control environments. An attacker exploiting this vulnerability can gain root-level access remotely without authentication, enabling full control over the PLC. This can lead to unauthorized manipulation of industrial processes, causing operational disruptions, safety hazards, and potential physical damage to equipment or infrastructure. The integrity and availability of the affected systems are at high risk, while confidentiality impact is minimal since the vulnerability does not directly expose sensitive data. Given the critical role PLCs play in sectors such as manufacturing, energy, water treatment, and transportation, exploitation could result in significant economic losses, safety incidents, and reputational damage. The lack of vendor support and patches for the affected firmware versions exacerbates the risk, as organizations cannot remediate through standard updates and must rely on compensating controls or device replacement. Additionally, the vulnerability could be leveraged as a foothold for lateral movement within OT networks, increasing the overall threat landscape.

CWE-798Use of Hard-coded Credentials (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product contains hard-coded credentials, such as a password or cryptographic key.
Architecture and Design
For outbound authentication: store passwords, keys, and other credentials outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320).
Architecture and Design
For inbound authentication: Rather than hard-code a default username and password, key, or other authentication credentials for first time logins, utilize a "first login" mode that requires the user to enter a unique strong password or key.
Architecture and Design
If the product must contain hard-coded credentials or they cannot be removed, perform access control checks and limit which entities can access the feature that requires the hard-coded credentials. For example, a feature might only be enabled through the system console instead of through a network connection.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.10.4 (opens in a new tab)
V6.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Read Sensitive Constants Within an Executable (opens in a new tab)
Try Common or Default Usernames and Passwords (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/google/security-research/security/advisories/GHSA-xf7j-4x67-6h93 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 02:22 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-798

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats