CVE-2024-13256
Email Contact Project Email Contact ≤ 2.0.4
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-13256 is a high-severity Insufficient Granularity of Access Control (CWE-1220) vulnerability in Email Contact Project Email Contact. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Cloud Services (T1021.007); ranked at the 33th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2024-13256 is an Insufficient Granularity of Access Control vulnerability in the Drupal Email Contact module that allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Email Contact versions from 0.0.0 before 2.0.4.
The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N), indicating it is exploitable over the network with low complexity, no privileges, and no user interaction required. Unauthenticated remote attackers can perform forceful browsing to bypass access controls, resulting in high integrity impact such as unauthorized modifications.
The Drupal security advisory SA-CONTRIB-2024-020 at https://www.drupal.org/sa-contrib-2024-020 provides details on mitigation, with the issue resolved in Email Contact version 2.0.4.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-51470
Vulnerability Data
Insufficient Granularity of Access Control vulnerability in Drupal Email Contact allows Forceful Browsing.This issue affects Email Contact: from 0.0.0 before 2.0.4.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V16.4.2V8.4.2V11.7.1V13.2.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Least privilege explicitly demands that only the minimum necessary accesses are granted, eliminating the broad permissions that define this weakness.
AC-24 requires access decisions to be applied precisely and unambiguously to every request, structurally blocking insufficiently granular policies.
AC-3 requires enforcement of authorizations according to policy, directly compelling sufficiently granular rules so broad allowances cannot be introduced.
AC-4 enforces approved information flows with explicit source/destination rules, preventing overly coarse access policies from being deployed.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.IR-01's segmentation + zero-trust rules directly enforce minimum-necessary access at network boundaries, removing most instances of overly broad policy; CWE-1220 can still exist in application-layer or intra-segment controls that this single outcome does not address.
PR.PS-06's general SDLC practices can surface granularity issues during design/review (partial prevention) but do not specifically target access-control policy breadth, so they remove only part of CWE-1220's risk.
CWE-1220 permits unauthorized access to sensitive assets but neither prevents nor impairs the delivery of adverse-event information to authorized recipients.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
A.5.15 directly mandates defining and implementing granular access control rules (including need-to-know, role-based restrictions, segregation, dynamic factors, and consistency with classification), which stops most insufficient-granularity cases from being exploitable; the bounded remainder is access-control defects inside individual applications or physical mechanisms that the clause explicitly delegates elsewhere (8.26, 7.2-7.4).
A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, adjustment and revocation of access rights (including granularity via segregation of duties, policy conformance and owner authorization), which stops most insufficient-granularity cases from being exploitable; the bounded remainder is access-control mechanisms whose implemented policy is simply too coarse even after rights are correctly assigned and reviewed.
A.8.2 directly controls allocation, review, temporary use, separation, and heightened authentication of privileged rights per least-privilege policy, which stops most insufficient-granularity cases from being exploitable; the bounded remainder is policy-level granularity flaws inside non-privileged code paths that never reach a privileged-rights decision.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (higher-evidence rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-225025 Local accounts with blank passwords must be restricted to prevent access from the network. blocks CWE-1220