CVE-2024-0056VulnerabilityPublished 15 Jan 2024Updated 21 Nov 2025

Red Hat Security Advisory: .NET 6.0 security, bug fix, and enhancement update

Affects Red Hat .NET 6.0Source GCVE Database

Compare

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Not known to be exploited.

Data as of 14 Nov 2026, 17:51 UTC

Severity

High

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

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Jan 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 14 Nov 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated packages rh-dotnet60-dotnet 6.0.126 and .NET Runtime 6.0.26 that fix these vulnerabilities. Users should apply these official updates promptly to remediate the security issues. Detailed update instructions are available in the Red Hat advisory at https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258. No additional mitigations are indicated or required beyond applying the vendor-provided patches.

Description

.NET 6.0 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux has received an important security update addressing multiple vulnerabilities, including information disclosure in SQL client libraries, X509 certificate validation bypass across Azure, and a denial of service vulnerability. Updated versions .NET SDK 6.0.126 and .NET Runtime 6.0.26 include these fixes. The update is available for RHEL 7 platforms including Server, Workstation, and Compute Node.

Impact

Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities could lead to unauthorized information disclosure, bypass of certificate validation potentially undermining secure communications, and denial of service conditions affecting .NET applications on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7. These issues impact the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of affected systems running .NET 6.0.

Summary

This Red Hat security advisory addresses three vulnerabilities in .NET 6.0: CVE-2024-0056 involves information disclosure in MD.SqlClient and System.data.SQLClient; CVE-2024-0057 is a validation bypass in X509 certificates affecting Azure environments; CVE-2024-21319 is a denial of service vulnerability. The advisory updates the rh-dotnet60-dotnet package to version 6.0.126 and the .NET runtime to 6.0.26 to remediate these issues. The vulnerabilities have been rated with an important security impact by Red Hat. No CVSS scores are provided in the advisory, but the severity is assessed as high.

CWE-420Unprotected Alternate Channel (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product protects a primary channel, but it does not use the same level of protection for an alternate channel.
Architecture and Design
Identify all alternate channels and use the same protection mechanisms that are used for the primary channels.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.14.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-295Improper Certificate Validation (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.
Implementation
If certificate pinning is being used, ensure that all relevant properties of the certificate are fully validated before the certificate is pinned, including the hostname.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V9.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.9.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
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).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Nov 2026, 17:51 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-420, CWE-295, CWE-400

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats