CVE-2024-45338VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jun 2025Updated 25 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: OpenShift API for Data Protection (OADP) 1.3.7 security and bug fix update

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Not known to be exploited : upgrade Red Hat to 1.3.7 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

Severity

High

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

EPSS: 1.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 64% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.3.7

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 Jun 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 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 Red Hat to 1.3.7.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Product Security Red Hat	Affected >=1.3.0 <1.3.7 Red Hat OpenShift API for Data Protection 9Base-OADP-1.3 amd64 oadp/oadp-kubevirt-velero-plugin-rhel9@sha256:ce4b69a7ec86aa550a50bd2fdc345111ee5215a148e03a04e14c99363ec47fd6_amd64 OpenShift Virtualization CNV 4.18 for RHEL 9 container-native-virtualization/aaq-controller-rhel9@sha256:9c59c01c21b1f032fed5a6a169c93e96f223e8a807c0c323a9362b945771a681_amd64 Red Hat Developer Hub (RHDH) Red Hat Developer Hub (RHDH) 1.4 registry.redhat.io/rhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9@sha256:d8268197ba0466643efb818fcad8f0fc29e32463f75b0f7f51d9ce75ec717572_amd64 CNV 4.17 for RHEL 9 container-native-virtualization/aaq-controller-rhel9@sha256:8e04085ab5661b05f372c605c6270981a26b598f0891fb22215bb79ded29711b_amd64 logical volume manager storage LVMS 4.15 for RHEL 9 arm64 lvms4/lvms-must-gather-rhel9@sha256:00d5249d3eca563f230af85c31ae241f4c50d763d22a7caa0593d6139e8509a6_arm64 LVMS 4.16 for RHEL 9 s390x lvms4/lvms-must-gather-rhel9@sha256:a9fc47d734d4341a82abe24ac8008117f6fa3f46c5c267cb5071f346ee844e5b_s390x LVMS 4.17 for RHEL 9 ppc64le lvms4/lvms-must-gather-rhel9@sha256:8f06e68afb3de17ef073d6b1194c1c102a3721328356fa061a5fa334107cb8c6_ppc64le Red Hat Insights for Runtimes Red Hat Insights for Runtimes 1.0 registry.redhat.io/insights-runtimes-tech-preview/runtimes-inventory-rhel8-operator@sha256:a7f94c4a1b5b513c76273678840f512358d4ac51281beacc36d1ea23b299f489_amd64 LVMS 4.14 for RHEL 9 lvms4/lvms-must-gather-rhel9@sha256:7ee6477d60f3fd1ad63e9745ff3ea251107f72b20b241d880364386c096de242_ppc64le CNV 4.14 for RHEL 9 container-native-virtualization/bridge-marker-rhel9@sha256:d9decf147c7cc894f5a861b208185b2f42ed81d6f6ff9fa069f5d5f8c7fbb5df_amd64 container-native-virtualization/aaq-controller-rhel9@sha256:cc3b097a083d3265372704174de2f226e7e4f7c5b6e752038b5347e0b46cff6f_amd64 Red Hat OpenShift Enterprise Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15 Cryostat Cryostat 3 on RHEL 8 cryostat-tech-preview/cryostat-db-rhel8@sha256:cc87993362b453460b47d2b8337f411ab12f68ec11114c4b26714e387a4fa3ac_arm64 Red Hat ACM Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.11 for RHEL 9 rhacm2/lighthouse-agent-rhel9@sha256:50d111733ab8210aadf6741847c2858a3adb6c96e6a3ee1414f4ff3bc51a1e43_arm64 Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.9 for RHEL 8 rhacm2/lighthouse-agent-rhel8@sha256:4103830b222e9e1bab1e312c7d4bf4792e93879430ce79e7f98ea09979319867_arm64 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.17 openshift4/kube-compare-artifacts-rhel9@sha256:8af8dfa63a2a891244144b4c0dbd47970f15b3795393b8aa19bcd21f0b9f8eb0_s390x RHDH RHDH 1.4 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13 Builds for Red Hat OpenShift Builds for Red Hat OpenShift 1.1.1 registry.redhat.io/openshift-builds/openshift-builds-controller-rhel9@sha256:9bbd9d38a700243149d85de444fc791482b662983b8ac7138e7fc88bcbb0c313_amd64 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.14	Fixed in 1.3.7

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released official fixes for this vulnerability. Users should apply the OpenShift API for Data Protection (OADP) 1.3.7 update and upgrade Red Hat OpenShift AI to version 2.16.0. The advisories provide updated container images and operator bundles. Before applying these updates, ensure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. Follow the detailed upgrade instructions provided by Red Hat in their advisories and documentation. No additional mitigation is required beyond applying these official updates.

Description

OpenShift API for Data Protection (OADP) enables you to back up and restore application resources, persistent volume data, and internal container images to external backup storage. OADP enables both file system-based and snapshot-based backups for persistent volumes. Security Fix(es) from Bugzilla: * golang.org/x/net/html: Non-linear parsing of case-insensitive content in golang.org/x/net/html (CVE-2024-45338) * golang.org/x/oauth2/jws: Unexpected memory consumption during token parsing in golang.org/x/oauth2/jws (CVE-2025-22868) * golang-jwt/jwt: jwt-go allows excessive memory allocation during header parsing (CVE-2025-30204) For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

Impact

The vulnerability allows improper parsing of HTML content which could lead to unexpected behavior or security issues in the affected components. Given the critical severity rating by Red Hat, the impact could be significant in environments using affected versions of OADP, Red Hat Developer Hub, and Red Hat OpenShift AI. However, no known exploits in the wild have been reported at this time.

Summary

CVE-2024-45338 is a vulnerability in the golang.org/x/net/html package that causes non-linear parsing of case-insensitive content, impacting Red Hat OpenShift API for Data Protection (OADP) and related Red Hat products such as Red Hat Developer Hub and Red Hat OpenShift AI. This issue is part of a set of security fixes released by Red Hat in their 1.3.7 update for OADP and version 2.16.0 for Red Hat OpenShift AI. The vulnerability is rated critical by Red Hat Product Security. The advisory references multiple related CVEs and provides updated container images and operator bundles to address the issue. The vulnerability affects versions >=1.3.0 and <1.3.7 of OADP and version 1.4.x of Red Hat Developer Hub. No active exploitation has been reported.

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).
CWE-1286Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product receives input that is expected to be well-formed - i.e., to comply with a certain syntax - but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input complies with the syntax.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (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
SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
NoSQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-405Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification) (opens in a new tab)
Class weakness
The product does not properly control situations in which an adversary can cause the product to consume or produce excessive resources without requiring the adversary to invest equivalent work or otherwise prove authorization, i.e., the adversary's influence is "asymmetric."
Architecture and Design
An application must make resources available to a client commensurate with the client's access level.
Architecture and Design
An application must, at all times, keep track of allocated resources and meter their usage appropriately.
System Configuration
Consider disabling resource-intensive algorithms on the server side, such as Diffie-Hellman key exchange.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1333Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product uses a regular expression with a worst-case computational complexity that is inefficient and possibly exponential.
Architecture and Design
Use regular expressions that do not support backtracking, e.g. by removing nested quantifiers.
System Configuration
Set backtracking limits in the configuration of the regular expression implementation, such as PHP's pcre.backtrack_limit. Also consider limits on execution time for the process.
Implementation
Do not use regular expressions with untrusted input. If regular expressions must be used, avoid using backtracking in the expression.
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
Regular Expression Exponential Blowup (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-835Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop') (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product contains an iteration or loop with an exit condition that cannot be reached, i.e., an infinite loop.
CWE-150Improper Neutralization of Escape, Meta, or Control Sequences (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could be interpreted as escape, meta, or control character sequences when they are sent to a downstream component.
Developers should anticipate that escape, meta and control characters/sequences will be injected/removed/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.
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.
Implementation · Output Encoding
While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
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)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Email Injection (opens in a new tab)
Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads (opens in a new tab)
Web Server Logs Tampering (opens in a new tab)
Log Injection-Tampering-Forging (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-94Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #10OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
Architecture and Design · Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Architecture and Design
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
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.
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)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
Code Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-88Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string.
Implementation · Parameterization
Where possible, avoid building a single string that contains the command and its arguments. Some languages or frameworks have functions that support specifying independent arguments, e.g. as an array, which is used to automatically perform the appropriate quoting or escaping while building the command.
Architecture and Design · Input Validation
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your product: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, request headers as well as content, URL components, e-mail, files, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (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
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Flash Parameter Injection (opens in a new tab)
Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP) (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Parameter Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-670Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation (opens in a new tab)
Class weakness
The code contains a control flow path that does not reflect the algorithm that the path is intended to implement, leading to incorrect behavior any time this path is navigated.
CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #5
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: 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 external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-330Use of Insufficiently Random Values (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Use a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and select well-tested implementations with adequate length seeds.
Implementation
Consider a PRNG that re-seeds itself as needed from high quality pseudo-random output sources, such as hardware devices.
Architecture and Design · Requirements · Libraries or Frameworks
Use products or modules that conform to FIPS 140-2 to avoid obvious entropy problems. Consult FIPS 140-2 Annex C ("Approved Random Number Generators").
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Forgot Password (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.6.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.7.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Signature Spoofing by Key Recreation (opens in a new tab)
Session Credential Falsification through Prediction (opens in a new tab)
Brute Force (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1336Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product uses a template engine to insert or process externally-influenced input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements or syntax that can be interpreted as template expressions or other code directives when processed by the engine.
Architecture and Design
Choose a template engine that offers a sandbox or restricted mode, or at least limits the power of any available expressions, function calls, or commands.
Implementation
Use the template engine's sandbox or restricted mode, if available.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
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)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-347Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Padding Oracle Crypto Attack (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).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Aug 2026, 23:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-770, CWE-1286, CWE-405 +11

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats