BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2024
CVE-2024-45159High confidence

As a result, an attacker that had a certificate valid for uses other than TLS client authentication would nonetheless be able to use it for TLS client authentication

Unknown · Unknown

9.8CriticalCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Within 72 hours

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.

Fix not verified
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityCriticalOperational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

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 0.39% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Unknown and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 3 daysRemediation target: Within 90 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Alpine, Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

7 package states
Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Alpine v3.23v3.23 · mainmbedtlsVendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected.3.6.1-r0Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026
Alpine v3.22v3.22 · mainmbedtlsVendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected.3.6.1-r0Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026
Alpine v3.21v3.21 · mainmbedtlsVendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected.3.6.1-r0Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026
Debian trixietrixie · sourcembedtlsNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcembedtlsNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcembedtlsNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcembedtlsNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2024-41339

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 72 hours

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.

Fix not verified
01

What, why and how

An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.1. With TLS 1.3, when a server enables optional authentication of the client, if the client-provided certificate does not have appropriate values in if keyUsage or extKeyUsage extensions, then the return value of mbedtls_ssl_get_verify_result() would incorrectly have the MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE and MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE bits clear. As a result, an attacker that had a certificate valid for uses other than TLS client authentication would nonetheless be able to use it for TLS client authentication. Only TLS 1.3 servers were affected, and only with optional authentication (with required authentication, the handshake would be aborted with a fatal alert).

What

An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.1. With TLS 1.3, when a server enables optional authentication of the client, if the client-provided certificate does not have appropriate values in if keyUsage or extKeyUsage extensions, then the return value of mbedtls_ssl_get_verify_result() would incorrectly have the MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE and MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE bits clear. As a result, an attacker that had a certificate valid for uses other than TLS client authentication would nonetheless be able to use it for TLS client authentication. Only TLS 1.3 servers were affected, and only with optional authentication (with required authentication, the handshake would be aborted with a fatal alert).

Why

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

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

An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.1. With TLS 1.3, when a server enables optional authentication of the client, if the client-provided certificate does not have appropriate values in if keyUsage or extKeyUsage extensions, then the return value of mbedtls_ssl_get_verify_result() would incorrectly have the MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE and MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE bits clear. As a result, an attacker that had a certificate valid for uses other than TLS client authentication would nonetheless be able to use it for TLS client authentication. Only TLS 1.3 servers were affected, and only with optional authentication (with required authentication, the handshake would be aborted with a fatal alert).

Why

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

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 Certificate 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-295 ↗

CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation. The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

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:H/I:H/A:H

Common 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.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.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.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-295
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20240911Security Bulletin 11 Sep 2024

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 11 Sep 2024, published on 11 September 2024. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0939Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Splunk

d?id=CVE-2022-48622 Référence CVE CVE-2023-29499 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-29499 Référence CVE CVE-2023-32611 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-32611 Référence CVE CVE-2023-32636 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-32636 Référence CVE CVE-2023-32665 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-32665 Référence CVE CVE-2024-34155 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-34155 Référence CVE CVE-2024-34156 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-34156 Référence CVE CVE-2024-34158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-34158 Référence CVE CVE-2024-34397 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-34397 Référence CVE CVE-2024-45159 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-45159 Référence CVE CVE-2024-45336 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-45336 Référence CVE CVE-2024-45341 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-45341 Référence CVE CVE-2024-52533 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-52533 Référence CVE CVE-2024-6763 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-6763 Référence CVE CVE-2025-22866 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22866 Référence CVE CVE-2025-22868 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22868 Référence CVE CVE-2025-22871 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22871 Référence CVE CVE-2025-22872 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CV

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2024-008504ARM Ltd. の ARM mbed TLS における証明書検証に関する脆弱性

ARM Ltd. の ARM mbed TLS には、証明書検証に関する脆弱性が存在します。

Official advisory ↗
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.
Fix not verified
Affected
n/a
Fixed
No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
Action
No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
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 5 Sept 2024 · Last source change 13 Mar 2025, 19:47 UTC · CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-41339
Product sourceUnavailable
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCISA ADP
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2024-45159 · cve.blacktree.nl