CVE-2024-53907VulnerabilityPublished 28 Jan 2025Updated 13 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 Product Security and Bug Fix Update

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2024-53907· High 7.5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 4.6.7 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS base score

7.5High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 1.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 72% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.6.7, 4.2.18, 3

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 6 Dec 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 2026-10-26.

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 redhat/automation-controller to 4.6.7; redhat/python3.11-django to 4.2.18; redhat/python3.11-jinja2 to 3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hatredhat/automation-controller`pkg:rpm/redhat/automation-controller`Other threats	Affected <4.6.7	Fixed in 4.6.7
Red Hatredhat/python3.11-django`pkg:rpm/redhat/python3.11-django`Other threats	Affected <4.2.18	Fixed in 4.2.18
Red Hatredhat/python3.11-jinja2`pkg:rpm/redhat/python3.11-jinja2`Other threats	Affected <3	Fixed in 3

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 official patches addressing these vulnerabilities. Users should upgrade to automation-controller version 4.6.7 or later, python3.11-django version 4.2.18 or later, and python3.11-jinja2 version 3.1.5 or later. The updates are available for Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 8 and 9, as well as version 2.4. Applying these updates will remediate the sandbox breakout, denial-of-service, and SQL injection vulnerabilities. No additional mitigation actions are required beyond applying the vendor-provided fixes.

Description

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform provides an enterprise framework for building, deploying and managing IT automation at scale. IT Managers can provide top-down guidelines on how automation is applied to individual teams, while automation developers retain the freedom to write tasks that leverage existing knowledge without the overhead. Ansible Automation Platform makes it possible for users across an organization to share, vet, and manage automation content by means of a simple, powerful, and agentless language. Security Fix(es): * automation-controller: Jinja has a sandbox breakout through indirect reference to format method (CVE-2024-56326) * automation-controller: Jinja has a sandbox breakout through malicious filenames (CVE-2024-56201) * automation-controller: Django: potential denial-of-service vulnerability in IPv6 validation (CVE-2024-56374) * python3.11-django: potential denial-of-service vulnerability in IPv6 validation (CVE-2024-56374) * python3.11-django: Potential denial-of-service in django.utils.html.strip_tags() (CVE-2024-53907) * python3.11-jinja2: Jinja has a sandbox breakout through indirect reference to format method (CVE-2024-56326) * python3.11-jinja2: Jinja has a sandbox breakout through malicious filenames (CVE-2024-56201) 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. Updates and fixes included: Automation controller * Fixed an issue where the order of source inventories was not respected by the ansible.controller collection (AAP-38524) * Fixed an issue where an actively running job on an execution node may have had its folder deleted by a system task (AAP-38137) * automation-controller has been updated to 4.6.7 Event-Driven Ansible: * Fixed an issue where users were unable to filter Rule Audits by rulebook activation name (AAP-39253) * Users are now able to create a new Event-Driven Ansible credential by copying an existing one (AAP-39249) * Added support for file and env injectors for Credentials (AAP-39091) * Fixed an issue where the input field of the injector configuration could not be empty (AAP-39086) * Fixed an issue where the application version in the openapi spec was incorrectly set (AAP-38392) * Fixed an issue where activations were not properly updated in some scenarios with a high load of the system (AAP-38374) * automation-eda-controller has been updated to 1.1.4 Container-based Ansible Automation Platform * Allow user to not provide the Postgresql admin account with external database (AAP-39077) * Using PostgreSQL TLS certificate authentication with an external database is now available (AAP-38400) * containerized installer setup has been updated to 2.5-9 RPM-based Ansible Automation Platform * Fixed an issue where gateway could not be setup with custom SSL certificates (AAP-38985) * Fixed an issue where the gateway services are not restarted when a dependency changes (AAP-38918) * Fixed an issue where setting automationedacontroller_max_running_activations could cause the installer to fail (AAP-38708) * ansible-automation-platform-installer and installer setup have been updated to 2.5-8 Additional changes: * python3.11-django has been updated to 4.2.18 * python3.11-jinja2 has been updated to 3.1.5 * python3.11-pulpcore has been updated to 3.49.30

Impact

The vulnerabilities could allow an attacker to escape the Jinja2 sandbox, potentially leading to unauthorized code execution or manipulation of templates. Denial-of-service vulnerabilities in Django components could allow attackers to disrupt service availability by exploiting IPv6 validation or HTML tag stripping functions. The SQL injection vulnerability could allow unauthorized database queries on Oracle backends. These issues collectively pose a high security risk to affected Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform deployments if left unpatched.

Summary

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform versions prior to 2.5.9 and related components are affected by several security vulnerabilities. Notably, Jinja2 has sandbox breakout vulnerabilities via indirect references to the format method (CVE-2024-56326) and malicious filenames (CVE-2024-56201). Django components have potential denial-of-service vulnerabilities in IPv6 validation (CVE-2024-56374) and in django.utils.html.strip_tags() (CVE-2024-53907). Additionally, a potential SQL injection vulnerability in Django's HasKey(lhs, rhs) on Oracle was addressed (CVE-2024-53908). Red Hat has released patched versions including automation-controller 4.6.7, python3.11-django 4.2.18, and python3.11-jinja2 3.1.5. These fixes address the sandbox breakout, denial-of-service, and injection vulnerabilities to improve the security posture of the platform.

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-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-89Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #2OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
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.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection (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 11 Aug 2026, 20:43 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-770, CWE-150, CWE-94 +1

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats