Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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-2024-1625 is a medium-severity Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) vulnerability in Lunary Lunary. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked at the 36th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as LLM Application Platforms; in the Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms risk domain.
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.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-17365
Vulnerability Data
An Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability exists in the lunary-ai/lunary application version 0.3.0, allowing unauthorized deletion of any organization's project. The vulnerability is due to insufficient authorization checks in the project deletion endpoint, where the endpoint fails to verify…
more
if the project ID provided in the request belongs to the requesting user's organization. As a result, an attacker can delete projects belonging to any organization by sending a crafted DELETE request with the target project's ID. This issue affects the project deletion functionality implemented in the projects.delete route.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Lunary.ai is an observability platform for AI/LLM applications, used in enterprise settings to manage AI projects, fitting the Enterprise AI Assistants category. The vulnerability is an IDOR in its project management endpoint.
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforcing approved authorizations on every access request structurally stops a user-controlled key from reaching another user's data.
Requiring explicit access-control decisions on each request blocks unauthorized key-driven access.
Least-privilege restrictions limit the scope of data reachable even if a key check is bypassed.
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.
Enforcing authorization policy and least privilege directly blocks user-controlled key tampering that bypasses access checks.
Logical access controls prevent unauthorized data access that results from missing authorization checks on object references.
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 requires defining and implementing access control rules (including authorization, need-to-know, role-based restrictions, formal requests, and consistency with classification) that stop one user from reaching another's data via a tampered key; the bounded remainder is dynamic or application-specific authorization logic (cross-referenced to 8.26) that may still allow bypass if those downstream rules are flawed.
Managing access rights includes ensuring users can only access their own records and not bypass authorization by altering identifiers.