CVE-2024-9287VulnerabilityPublished 2 Oct 2026Updated 3 Oct 2026

SUSE · python313-virtualenv-21.14.2-1.1 on GA media

Affects SUSESource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-11168

Not known to be exploited · fixed in 3.13.1 : update SUSE when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

Severity

Medium

Rated by Threat Radar · CVSS not yet scored by NVD

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 50% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.13.1, 3.12.8, 3.11.11 +2

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Oct 2026
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 to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Bitnamipython`pkg:bitnami/python`Other threats	Affected <3.9.21 >=3.10.0 <3.10.16 >=3.11.0 <3.11.11 >=3.12.0 <3.12.8 >=3.13.0 <3.13.1	Fixed in 3.9.21 3.10.16 3.11.11 3.12.8 3.13.1

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

AI-suggested

A patch is available and has been released in the python313-virtualenv-21.14.2-1.1 package for openSUSE Tumbleweed and in updated python3:3.6.8 packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. Users should apply these official updates to remediate the vulnerabilities. Refer to the vendor advisories for detailed update instructions.

Description

Multiple security issues in the python3 virtual environment (venv) activation scripts and IPv6 address validation were fixed in the python313-virtualenv-21.14.2-1.1 package for openSUSE Tumbleweed and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. The primary vulnerabilities include improper quoting of paths in venv activation scripts (CVE-2024-9287) and improper validation of IPv6 and IPvFuture addresses (CVE-2024-11168). These issues have been addressed in updated packages provided by SUSE and Red Hat.

CWE-428Unquoted Search Path or Element (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product uses a search path that contains an unquoted element, in which the element contains whitespace or other separators. This can cause the product to access resources in a parent path.
Implementation
Properly quote the full search path before executing a program on 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 · 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).
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1287Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product receives input that is expected to be of a certain type, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input is actually of the expected type.
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)
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 3 Oct 2026, 18:21 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-428, CWE-1287

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats