CVE-2024-24789VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jul 2024Updated 13 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Release of openshift-serverless-clients kn 1.33.1 security update and bug fixes

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-24790

Not known to be exploited : upgrade to 1.22.4 or 1.21.11 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

Severity

Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 38% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.22.4, 1.21.11

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 Jul 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 2026-10-25.

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

Upgrade golang to 1.22.4 or 1.21.11.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Bitnamigolang`pkg:bitnami/golang`Other threats	Affected <1.21.11 >=1.22.0-0 <1.22.4	Fixed in 1.21.11 1.22.4

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

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated packages for the Go Toolset in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 that address these vulnerabilities. Users should apply these official updates following Red Hat's published guidance at https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258 to remediate the issues. No additional mitigation steps are indicated beyond applying the vendor-provided patches.

Description

The archive/zip package's handling of certain types of invalid zip files differs from the behavior of most zip implementations. This misalignment could be exploited to create an zip file with contents that vary depending on the implementation reading the file. The archive/zip package now rejects files containing these errors.

Impact

The vulnerabilities may cause incorrect processing of ZIP files and unexpected behavior in network address handling within applications using the Go Toolset. This could potentially lead to application errors or unexpected behavior but is not described as enabling direct code execution or privilege escalation. The overall security impact is rated as moderate by Red Hat.

Summary

Red Hat has issued security advisories for the Go Toolset in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 addressing two vulnerabilities: CVE-2024-24789, which is an incorrect handling of certain ZIP files in the golang archive/zip package, and CVE-2024-24790, which involves unexpected behavior in the Is methods for IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses in the golang net/netip package. These issues could lead to incorrect processing of ZIP files and unexpected network address behavior, respectively. The advisories provide updated packages to fix these vulnerabilities. The affected products include Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 across multiple architectures and related components such as Red Hat OpenShift Serverless clients. Red Hat rates the security impact as moderate and provides detailed update instructions in their advisories.

CWE-20Improper Input Validation (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #18OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of…
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any…
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
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Include (SSI) Injection (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-115Misinterpretation of Input (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product misinterprets an input, whether from an attacker or another product, in a security-relevant fashion.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.5 (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 14 Aug 2026, 23:26 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-20, CWE-115

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats