CVE-2024-10234VulnerabilityPublished 14 Jul 2025Updated 19 Aug 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.23 Security update

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2024-10234· Medium 6.1

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.1 Medium : upgrade the Red Hat redhat/jboss-eap7 package to 7.4.23 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 51% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.4.23

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 22 Oct 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 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 the Red Hat redhat/jboss-eap7 package to 7.4.23.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hatredhat/jboss-eap7`pkg:rpm/redhat/jboss-eap7`Other threats	Affected >=7.4.0 <7.4.23	Fixed in 7.4.23

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

AI-suggested

A security update is available in Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.23, which addresses all listed vulnerabilities. Users should apply this update after ensuring all prior errata are installed and backing up their systems. The vendor advisory confirms the availability of an official fix. Refer to Red Hat's official update documentation for detailed instructions on applying the patch.

Description

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7 is a platform for Java applications based on the WildFly application runtime. This release of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.23 serves as a replacement for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.22, and includes bug fixes and enhancements. See the Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.23 Release Notes for information about the most significant bug fixes and enhancements included in this release. Security Fix(es): * commons-beanutils-core: Apache Commons BeanUtils: PropertyUtilsBean does not suppresses an enum's declaredClass property by default [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-48734) * commons-beanutils: Apache Commons BeanUtils: PropertyUtilsBean does not suppresses an enum's declaredClass property by default [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-48734) * commons-beanutils-commons-beanutils: Apache Commons BeanUtils: PropertyUtilsBean does not suppresses an enum's declaredClass property by default [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-48734) * hibernate-validator: Hibernate Validator Expression Language Injection [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-35036) * org.wildfly.core/wildfly-core-management-subsystem: Wildfly vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2024-10234) * org.apache.cxf/cxf-core: Apache CXF: Denial of Service vulnerability with temporary files [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-23184) * org.jboss.hal-hal-parent: Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in JBoss EAP Management Console [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-2901) * wildfly-ejb3: Improper Deserialization in JBoss Marshalling Allows Remote Code Execution [eap-7.4.z] (CVE-2025-2251) 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.

Impact

The vulnerabilities fixed in this update include cross-site scripting flaws that could allow attackers to execute scripts in the context of the affected application, an expression language injection vulnerability that could lead to unauthorized expression evaluation, a denial of service vulnerability in Apache CXF, and a critical improper deserialization vulnerability that could allow remote code execution. These issues collectively pose a high security risk to affected systems running vulnerable versions of Red Hat JBoss EAP 7.4.

Summary

This advisory covers a security update for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.23, which addresses seven CVEs affecting various components. Notable vulnerabilities include CVE-2024-10234 (WildFly core XSS), CVE-2025-2251 (improper deserialization in JBoss Marshalling leading to remote code execution), CVE-2025-2901 (stored XSS in JBoss EAP Management Console), CVE-2025-23184 (Denial of Service in Apache CXF), CVE-2025-35036 (Hibernate Validator Expression Language Injection), and CVE-2025-48734 (Apache Commons BeanUtils PropertyUtilsBean issue). The update includes bug fixes and enhancements and replaces the previous 7.4.22 release.

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-502Deserialization of Untrusted Data (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #15OWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
Implementation
When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe.
Implementation
Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Object Injection (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).
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-284Improper Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #19OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Embedding Scripts within Scripts (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Windows Service Configuration (opens in a new tab)
Malicious Root Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Intent Spoof (opens in a new tab)
WebView Exposure (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 7 Aug 2026, 17:21 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79, CWE-502, CWE-400 +2

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats