CVE-2024-8285VulnerabilityPublished 30 Aug 2024Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-8285: Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.9Medium

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.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: 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.
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 30 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 2026-10-26.

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-2024-8285, organizations should immediately upgrade Kroxylicious to a version where proper TLS hostname verification is enforced once a patch is released. Until then, administrators should manually verify and enforce strict TLS validation policies in Kroxylicious configurations if possible. Network defenses should be strengthened to prevent MitM attacks, including deploying DNSSEC to protect DNS integrity, using network segmentation, and employing strong routing security measures. Monitoring for unusual network traffic or certificate anomalies can help detect attempted exploitation. Restrict access to Kroxylicious configuration and peer systems to minimize the risk of privilege escalation. Additionally, organizations should review Kafka client and server TLS configurations to ensure end-to-end encryption and hostname verification are properly implemented. Regular security audits and penetration testing focusing on TLS and network infrastructure can further reduce exposure.

Description

A flaw was found in Kroxylicious. When establishing the connection with the upstream Kafka server using a TLS secured connection, Kroxylicious fails to properly verify the server's hostname, resulting in an insecure connection. For a successful attack to be performed, the attacker needs to perform a Man-in-the-Middle attack or compromise any external systems, such as DNS or network routing configuration. This issue is considered a high complexity attack, with additional high privileges required, as the attack would need access to the Kroxylicious configuration or a peer system. The result of a successful attack impacts both data integrity and confidentiality.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-8285 is the potential compromise of data confidentiality and integrity in Kafka environments using Kroxylicious 0.80.0. An attacker capable of executing a MitM attack or controlling network/DNS infrastructure could intercept or alter Kafka traffic, leading to unauthorized data disclosure or manipulation. This can undermine trust in data pipelines, disrupt business processes relying on Kafka messaging, and expose sensitive information. Since Kroxylicious is often deployed in enterprise environments for Kafka traffic routing and transformation, the vulnerability could affect critical data flows in financial services, telecommunications, and large-scale distributed systems. However, the high complexity and privilege requirements limit the likelihood of widespread exploitation. No availability impact reduces the risk of service disruption, but the confidentiality and integrity risks remain significant for organizations handling sensitive or regulated data.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…