VulnerabilityPublished 2 Aug 2024Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-7319: Information Exposure

Source CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2023-1625

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.0 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
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: 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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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 2 Aug 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

Organizations should first verify if their OpenStack Heat deployments are affected by this vulnerability, particularly if they use the 'stack abandon' command with hidden features enabled. Since no official patches or updates are linked yet, administrators should monitor OpenStack security advisories and apply patches as soon as they become available. In the interim, restrict access to the Heat API and CLI commands to trusted and authenticated users only, enforcing the principle of least privilege to limit who can execute 'stack abandon' operations. Audit and monitor usage of the 'stack abandon' command for unusual activity. Consider disabling or avoiding use of the hidden feature related to this vulnerability until a fix is confirmed. Network segmentation and firewall rules should be employed to limit exposure of the Heat service to untrusted networks. Additionally, review and rotate any sensitive credentials or secrets that might have been exposed due to this vulnerability. Finally, incorporate this vulnerability into incident response and risk management processes to ensure timely detection and remediation.

Description

An incomplete fix for CVE-2023-1625 was found in openstack-heat. Sensitive information may possibly be disclosed through the OpenStack stack abandon command with the hidden feature set to True and the CVE-2023-1625 fix applied.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-7319 is the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information within OpenStack Heat environments. This can lead to leakage of confidential cloud orchestration data, potentially exposing infrastructure details, configuration secrets, or other sensitive metadata. Such exposure could aid attackers in further reconnaissance or facilitate subsequent attacks against cloud deployments. Since OpenStack Heat is widely used in private and public clouds, organizations relying on it for orchestration may face risks to their confidentiality posture. Although the vulnerability does not affect system integrity or availability directly, the information disclosure could undermine trust and compliance, especially in regulated industries. The requirement for some privileges limits exploitation to insiders or compromised accounts, but network accessibility broadens the potential attack surface. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits over time.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…