CVE-2024-32002VulnerabilityPublished 29 Aug 2024Updated 18 Jul 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: git security update

Affects Red Hat gitSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-32004

Not known to be exploited · 29% EPSS.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

Severity

High

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

EPSS: 29.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 98% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 29 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 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 Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream AUS (v.8.4) Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream E4S (v.8.4) Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream TUS (v.8.4)	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated Git packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 variants that address these vulnerabilities. Users should apply the security update as described in Red Hat advisory RHSA-2024:6028 and the referenced article https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258. Applying the official update fully mitigates these vulnerabilities.

Description

Git is a distributed revision control system with a decentralized architecture. As opposed to centralized version control systems with a client-server model, Git ensures that each working copy of a Git repository is an exact copy with complete revision history. This not only allows the user to work on and contribute to projects without the need to have permission to push the changes to their official repositories, but also makes it possible for the user to work with no network connection. Security Fix(es): * git: Recursive clones RCE (CVE-2024-32002) * git: RCE while cloning local repos (CVE-2024-32004) For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

Impact

Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code on affected systems during Git clone operations, potentially leading to system compromise. The vulnerabilities affect Git operations involving recursive cloning and cloning of local repositories. Red Hat rates the security impact as Important (high severity). There are no known exploits in the wild at this time.

Summary

This advisory addresses two security vulnerabilities in Git, a distributed version control system. CVE-2024-32002 involves a remote code execution vulnerability triggered by recursive clones, while CVE-2024-32004 involves RCE during cloning of local repositories. Both vulnerabilities could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code during Git operations. The affected products include Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 variants. Red Hat has provided updated Git packages to fix these issues as detailed in advisory RHSA-2024:6028.

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-114Process Control (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
Executing commands or loading libraries from an untrusted source or in an untrusted environment can cause an application to execute malicious commands (and payloads) on behalf of an attacker.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Libraries that are loaded should be well understood and come from a trusted source. The application can execute code contained in the native libraries, which often contain calls that are susceptible to other security problems, such as buffer overflows or command injection.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Inclusion of Code in Existing Process (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 4 Jul 2026, 01:28 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22, CWE-114

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats