VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2025Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2024-9229: stangirard/quivr · Unthrottled Resource Allocation

Affects stangirard/quivrSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 55% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 20 Mar 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubstangirard/quivr`pkg:github/stangirard/quivr`Other threats	Affected =0.0.298	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-9229, organizations should implement several specific measures beyond generic advice: 1) Apply strict input validation on multipart boundaries to reject malformed or excessively long boundaries before processing. 2) Introduce resource throttling and limits on the size and complexity of multipart requests to prevent excessive CPU and memory consumption. 3) Deploy rate limiting on file upload endpoints to reduce the risk of automated or volumetric attacks exploiting this vulnerability. 4) Monitor server resource usage and implement anomaly detection to identify unusual spikes indicative of exploitation attempts. 5) If possible, isolate the file upload service in a container or sandbox environment to limit the impact of resource exhaustion. 6) Engage with the vendor or open-source community to obtain patches or updates addressing this vulnerability as soon as they become available. 7) Consider implementing Web Application Firewalls (WAF) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious multipart boundary manipulations. 8) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on file upload functionalities to uncover similar weaknesses.

Description

A Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability in the file upload feature of stangirard/quivr v0.0.298 allows unauthenticated attackers to cause excessive resource consumption by appending characters to the end of a multipart boundary in an HTTP request. This leads to the server continuously processing each character, rendering the service unavailable and impacting all users.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2024-9229 is service disruption due to Denial of Service conditions. Organizations relying on stangirard/quivr for critical operations, especially those handling file uploads or managing user-generated content, may experience downtime, leading to operational delays and potential loss of customer trust. The unavailability of services can affect business continuity, particularly for sectors like finance, healthcare, and public services where uptime is critical. Additionally, the ease of exploitation without authentication means attackers can launch attacks at scale, potentially causing widespread outages. While the vulnerability does not compromise data confidentiality or integrity, the availability impact alone can have severe financial and reputational consequences. European cloud service providers or SaaS platforms integrating stangirard/quivr could also face cascading effects if the vulnerability is exploited, affecting multiple downstream customers. The lack of patches increases the urgency for proactive mitigation to avoid exploitation.

CWE-770Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #25
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
Requirements
Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
Architecture and Design
Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V11.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Exponential Data Expansion (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data Parameter Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data with Nested Payloads (opens in a new tab)
Oversized Serialized Data Payloads (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

huntr.com/bounties/946a412d-422f-4623-bb1d-d2646ad23dfd (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 13:06 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-770

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats