Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2024-49369· NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

Icinga 2 has a TLS Certificate Validation Bypass for JSON-RPC and HTTP API Connections

Icinga is a monitoring system which checks the availability of network resources, notifies users of outages, and generates performance data for reporting. The TLS certificate validation in all Icinga 2 versions starting from 2.4.0 was flawed, allowing an attacker to impersonate both trusted cluster nodes as well as any API users that use TLS client certificates for authentication (ApiUser objects with the client_cn attribute set). This vulnerability has been fixed in v2.14.3, v2.13.10, v2.12.11, and v2.11.12.

CriticalCVSS 9.8 · v3.1—Proof of concept Fix available
Published
Nov 12, 2024
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
2.9% · 86th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

40

Plan

Add it to your regular patch cycle.

CVSS
39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
1 / 30 · 2.9%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
none
Automatable
yes
Technical impact
total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
—
CNA · GitHub_M
9.8
NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Affected systems

VendorProduct
icingaicinga
debiandebian linux

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • debian debian linux11.0
  • icinga icinga2.4.0 and later · before 2.11.12
  • icinga icinga2.12.0 and later · before 2.12.11
  • icinga icinga2.13.0 and later · before 2.13.10
  • icinga icinga2.14.0 and later · before 2.14.3

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • Icinga icinga2

    • >= 2.4.0, < 2.11.12, >= 2.12.0, < 2.12.11, >= 2.13.0, < 2.13.10, >= 2.14.0, < 2.14.3affected

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
Debian:11icinga2before 2.12.3-1+deb11u12.12.3-1+deb11u1
Debian:12icinga2before 2.13.6-2+deb12u22.13.6-2+deb12u2
Debian:13icinga2before 2.14.3-12.14.3-1
openSUSE:Tumbleweedicinga2before 2.14.3-1.12.14.3-1.1
SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP5icinga2before 2.13.10-bp155.3.3.12.13.10-bp155.3.3.1
SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP5icinga2before 2.13.10-bp155.3.3.12.13.10-bp155.3.3.1
SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP6icinga2before 2.13.10-bp156.4.3.12.13.10-bp156.4.3.1
SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP6icinga2before 2.13.10-bp156.4.3.12.13.10-bp156.4.3.1

Same product

icinga: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2025-48057Icinga 2 certificate renewal might incorrectly renew an invalid certificate
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2021-32743Passwords used to access external services inadvertently exposed through API
    36Monitor
  • CVE-2020-29663Icinga 2 v2.8.0 through v2.11.7 and v2.12.2 has an issue where revoked certificates due for renewal will automatically be renewed, ignoring
    36Monitor
  • CVE-2021-32739Results of queries for ApiListener objects include the ticket salt which allows in turn to steal (more privileged) identities
    35Monitor
  • CVE-2024-24820Icinga Director configuration is susceptible to Cross-Site Request Forgery
    33Monitor
  • CVE-2018-6535An issue was discovered in Icinga 2.x through 2.8.1.
    32Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / packageFixed versionSource
Debian:icinga22.13.6-2+deb12u2 · Debian:12Package registry (OSV)
openSUSE:icinga22.13.10-bp155.3.3.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.5Package registry (OSV)
SUSE:icinga22.13.10-bp155.3.3.1 · SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP5Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

Proof of concept available

A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.

Evidence

  • Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub ×1

Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.

Public exploit evidence
SourceKindDate
Proof-of-concept repository on GitHubstars:22024-11-29

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

  1. Published
  2. First PoC+16 d
  3. TodaySep 29, 2026+686 d
EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted
Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
High
Availability impact
High

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

CVSS vector

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

nvd-secondary

Root cause

A certificate validation error is silently swallowed instead of terminating the connection. Often, code added for a test environment makes its way into production.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-295 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

kotlin
override fun checkServerTrusted(chain: Array<X509Certificate>, type: String) {  // Left empty for the test environment}

Fixed

kotlin
val client = OkHttpClient.Builder()  .certificatePinner(    CertificatePinner.Builder()      .add("api.sirius.example", "sha256/…")      .build()  ).build()

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records