CVE-2024-28863VulnerabilityPublished 9 Oct 2024Updated 13 Oct 2026

Red Hat Enhancement Advisory: Red Hat OpenShift Pipelines Operator Bundle 1.16.0 release

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Not known to be exploited.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

Severity

High

Rated by Threat Radar · No CVSS score from NVD or the CNA

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 60% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Oct 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Product Security Red Hat	Affected =1.16.0 Red Hat Red Hat OpenShift Pipelines OpenShift Pipelines version 1.16 for RHEL 8 s390x openshift-pipelines/pipelines-chains-controller-rhel8@sha256:6b3e1fb2d534596e811290912f44adc7e802f0b9221fdf99c040804741be51f4_s390x	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released OpenShift Pipelines Operator Bundle version 1.16.0 which includes fixes for the identified vulnerabilities. Users should apply this update to affected OpenShift Pipelines installations to remediate the issues. Before applying this update, ensure all previously released relevant errata have been applied. Detailed update instructions are available in the Red Hat knowledge base article referenced in the advisory. No additional mitigation steps are specified beyond applying the update.

Description

Red Hat OpenShift Pipelines is a cloud-native continuous integration and delivery (CI/CD) solution for building pipelines using Tekton. Tekton is a flexible, Kubernetes-native, open-source CI/CD framework which enables automating deployments across multiple platforms such as Kubernetes, Serverless, and VMs by abstracting away the underlying details. Red Hat OpenShift Pipelines consists of: - Tekton Operator 0.73.x - Tekton Pipelines 0.62.x - Tekton Triggers 0.29.x - Tekton tkn CLI 0.38.x - Tekton Chains 0.22.x (GA) - Pipelines-as-Code 0.28.x (GA) - ClusterTasks based on Tekton Catalog - Tekton Hub 1.18.x (TP) - Tekton Result 0.11.x (TP) - Manual-Approval-Gate 0.3.x (TP) ## Features - Standard CI/CD pipelines definition - Easy to extend and integrate with existing tools - Portable across any Kubernetes platform - Designed for microservices and decentralized teams - Integrated with OpenShift Developer Console - Build images with Kubernetes tools such as S2I, Buildah, Buildpacks, Kaniko, etc. - Deploy applications to multiple platforms such as Kubernetes, Serverless, and VMs - Scale pipelines on-demand - Enhance supply chain security with Tekton Chains (Technology Preview) - Install and deploy Tekton Hub (Technology Preview) with custom catalog on enterprise cluster - Maintain pipelines definitions as parts of an application repository with Pipelines-as-Code (PAC) (General Availability) For more information, see the Release Notes on any one of the following platforms: - Customer Portal: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openshift_pipelines/1.14/html/about_openshift_pipelines/op-release-notes#op-release-notes-1-14_op-release-notes - OpenShift documentation: https://docs.openshift.com/pipelines/1.14/about/op-release-notes.html#op-release-notes-1-14_op-release-notes

Impact

The vulnerabilities addressed in this release are rated as high severity and involve potential risks such as resource exhaustion, URL redirection, path traversal, and server-side request forgery. These issues could impact the security and reliability of CI/CD pipelines managed by OpenShift Pipelines, potentially allowing attackers to disrupt pipeline operations or manipulate pipeline behavior. However, there is no indication of known exploits in the wild at the time of this advisory.

Summary

This advisory announces the release of Red Hat OpenShift Pipelines Operator Bundle version 1.16.0, which includes updates to Tekton components such as Tekton Operator 0.73.x, Tekton Pipelines 0.62.x, and others. The release addresses multiple vulnerabilities identified by CVE identifiers including CVE-2024-28863, CVE-2024-29041, CVE-2024-29180, and CVE-2024-39338, among others. The vulnerabilities relate to issues categorized under CWEs such as CWE-400 (Uncontrolled Resource Consumption), CWE-601 (URL Redirection), CWE-22 (Path Traversal), and CWE-918 (Server-Side Request Forgery). The advisory references the Red Hat errata RHEA-2024:7870 and provides links to release notes and documentation for further details. No explicit CVSS scores or detailed exploitation information are provided. The affected versions include OpenShift Pipelines 1.16.0 across multiple architectures including x86_64, ppc64le, s390x, and aarch64.

CWE-400Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
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. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place.
Architecture and Design
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or; uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Regular Expression Exponential Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Sustained Client Engagement (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-601URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: LowOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
Use an intermediate disclaimer page that provides the user with a clear warning that they are leaving the current site. Implement a long timeout before the redirect occurs, or force the user to click on the link. Be careful to avoid XSS problems (CWE-79) when generating the disclaimer page.
Architecture and Design · Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.1.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross-Site Flashing (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Aug 2026, 20:17 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-400, CWE-601, CWE-22 +1

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats