GHSA-HFWX-J6H2-RMF7

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-19 18:31 – Updated: 2024-11-19 18:31
VLAI
Details

The Versa Director uses PostgreSQL (Postgres) to store operational and configuration data. It is also needed for High Availability function of the Versa Director. The default configuration has a common password across all instances of Versa Director. By default, Versa Director configures Postgres to listen on all network interfaces. This combination allows an unauthenticated attacker to access and administer the database or read local filesystem contents to escalate privileges on the system.

Exploitation Status: Versa Networks is not aware of this exploitation in any production systems. A proof of concept exists in the lab environment.

Workarounds or Mitigation: Starting with the latest 22.1.4 version of Versa Director, the software will automatically restrict access to the Postgres and HA ports to only the local and peer Versa Directors. For older releases, Versa recommends performing manual hardening of HA ports. Please refer to the following link for the steps https://docs.versa-networks.com/Solutions/System_Hardening/Perform_Manual_Hardening_for_Versa_Director#Secure_HA_Ports

This vulnerability is not exploitable on Versa Directors if published Firewall guidelines are implemented. We have validated that no Versa-hosted head ends have been affected by this vulnerability. All Versa-hosted head ends are patched and hardened.

Please contact Versa Technical Support or Versa account team for any further assistance.

Software Download Links: 22.1.4: https://support.versa-networks.com/support/solutions/articles/23000026708-release-22-1-4

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-42450"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-798"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-19T18:15:20Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "The Versa Director uses PostgreSQL (Postgres) to store operational and configuration data. It is also needed for High Availability function of the Versa Director. The default configuration has a common password across all instances of Versa Director. By default, Versa Director configures Postgres to listen on all network interfaces. This combination allows an unauthenticated attacker to access and administer the database or read local filesystem contents to escalate privileges on the system. \n\nExploitation Status:\nVersa Networks is not aware of this exploitation in any production systems. A proof of concept exists in the lab environment.\n\nWorkarounds or Mitigation:\nStarting with the latest 22.1.4 version of Versa Director, the software will automatically restrict access to the Postgres and HA ports to only the local and peer Versa Directors. For older releases, Versa recommends performing manual hardening of HA ports. Please refer to the following link for the steps https://docs.versa-networks.com/Solutions/System_Hardening/Perform_Manual_Hardening_for_Versa_Director#Secure_HA_Ports  \n\nThis vulnerability is not exploitable on Versa Directors if published Firewall guidelines are implemented. We have validated that no Versa-hosted head ends have been affected by this vulnerability. All Versa-hosted head ends are patched and hardened. \n\nPlease contact Versa Technical Support or Versa account team for any further assistance.\n\nSoftware Download Links:\n22.1.4: https://support.versa-networks.com/support/solutions/articles/23000026708-release-22-1-4",
  "id": "GHSA-hfwx-j6h2-rmf7",
  "modified": "2024-11-19T18:31:06Z",
  "published": "2024-11-19T18:31:06Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-42450"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security-portal.versa-networks.com/emailbulletins/6735a300415abb89e9a8a9d3"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Events included in the timeline

Loading timeline…


    Loading…

    Loading…

    Loading…

    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.