Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.97% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2024
CVE-2024-27918High confidence
Coder's OIDC authentication allows email with partially matching domain to register
coder · coder
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-7CC2-R658-7XPF ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
8.2HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Patch availableHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs coder coder and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Open-source package ranges4 source-attributed ranges
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gogithub.com/coder/coder | SEMVER: introduced 0; last affected 0.27.3 | Not stated | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026 |
| Gogithub.com/coder/coder/v2 | SEMVER: introduced 2.8.0; fixed 2.8.4 | 2.8.4 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026 |
| Gogithub.com/coder/coder/v2 | SEMVER: introduced 2.7.0; fixed 2.7.3 | 2.7.3 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026 |
| Gogithub.com/coder/coder/v2 | SEMVER: introduced 0; fixed 2.6.1 | 2.6.1 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026 |
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Patch available01
What, why and how
Coder allows oragnizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.6.1, 2.7.3, and 2.8.4, a vulnerability in Coder's OIDC authentication could allow an attacker to bypass the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` verification and create an account with an email not in the allowlist. Deployments are only affected if the OIDC provider allows users to create accounts on the provider. During OIDC registration, the user's email was improperly validated against the allowed `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN`s. This could allow a user with a domain that only partially matched an allowed domain to successfully login or register. An attacker could register a domain name that exploited this vulnerability and register on a Coder instance with a public OIDC provider. Coder instances with OIDC enabled and protected by the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` configuration are affected. Coder instances using a private OIDC provider are not affected, as arbitrary users cannot register through a private OIDC provider without first having an account on the provider. Public OIDC providers are impacted. GitHub authentication and external authentication are not impacted. This vulnerability is remedied in versions 2.8.4, 2.7.3, and 2.6.1 All versions prior to these patches are affected by the vulnerability.*It is recommended that customers upgrade their deployments as soon as possible if they are utilizing OIDC authentication with the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` setting.
What
Coder allows oragnizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.6.1, 2.7.3, and 2.8.4, a vulnerability in Coder's OIDC authentication could allow an attacker to bypass the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` verification and create an account with an email not in the allowlist. Deployments are only affected if the OIDC provider allows users to create accounts on the provider. During OIDC registration, the user's email was improperly validated against the allowed `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN`s. This could allow a user with a domain that only partially matched an allowed domain to successfully login or register. An attacker could register a domain name that exploited this vulnerability and register on a Coder instance with a public OIDC provider. Coder instances with OIDC enabled and protected by the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` configuration are affected. Coder instances using a private OIDC provider are not affected, as arbitrary users cannot register through a private OIDC provider without first having an account on the provider. Public OIDC providers are impacted. GitHub authentication and external authentication are not impacted. This vulnerability is remedied in versions 2.8.4, 2.7.3, and 2.6.1 All versions prior to these patches are affected by the vulnerability.*It is recommended that customers upgrade their deployments as soon as possible if they are utilizing OIDC authentication with the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` setting.
Why
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
Coder allows oragnizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.6.1, 2.7.3, and 2.8.4, a vulnerability in Coder's OIDC authentication could allow an attacker to bypass the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` verification and create an account with an email not in the allowlist. Deployments are only affected if the OIDC provider allows users to create accounts on the provider. During OIDC registration, the user's email was improperly validated against the allowed `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN`s. This could allow a user with a domain that only partially matched an allowed domain to successfully login or register. An attacker could register a domain name that exploited this vulnerability and register on a Coder instance with a public OIDC provider. Coder instances with OIDC enabled and protected by the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` configuration are affected. Coder instances using a private OIDC provider are not affected, as arbitrary users cannot register through a private OIDC provider without first having an account on the provider. Public OIDC providers are impacted. GitHub authentication and external authentication are not impacted. This vulnerability is remedied in versions 2.8.4, 2.7.3, and 2.6.1 All versions prior to these patches are affected by the vulnerability.*It is recommended that customers upgrade their deployments as soon as possible if they are utilizing OIDC authentication with the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` setting.
Why
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Improper Input Validation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-20 ↗
CWE-20: Improper Input Validation. The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 6 Mar 2024 · Last source change 5 Aug 2024, 18:06 UTC · CWE-20 · Improper Input Validation
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-0857
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.