CVE-2024-1902
Lunary ≤ 1.2.8
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-2024-1902 is a high-severity Incorrect Synchronization (CWE-821) vulnerability in Lunary Lunary. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 31th 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 SC-4 (Information in Shared System Resources) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-17624
Vulnerability Data
lunary-ai/lunary is vulnerable to a session reuse attack, allowing a removed user to change the organization name without proper authorization. The vulnerability stems from the lack of validation to check if a user is still part of an organization before…
more
allowing them to make changes. An attacker can exploit this by using an old authorization token to send a PATCH request, modifying the organization's name even after being removed from the organization. This issue is due to incorrect synchronization and affects the orgs.patch 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/lunary is an open-source LLM observability and management platform, fitting as an 'Other Platforms' category for AI/ML tools, as confirmed by the AI/ML bug bounty context on Huntr.
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SC-4 directly requires preventing unintended information transfer through shared resources, structurally blocking the concurrent unsynchronized access described by CWE-821.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require correct concurrency controls and synchronization primitives to prevent race conditions.
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.
Secure SDLC practices include concurrency and synchronization requirements that reduce race conditions.
A.8.26 only requires that security requirements (including resilience against attacks such as injections) be identified and specified during development or acquisition; it does not itself enforce, implement, or prevent any concurrent access flaw from being introduced or exploited.
Secure architecture principles address concurrent access and resource synchronization.
Secure coding standards directly require correct synchronization primitives and thread-safety.
Security testing can detect synchronization flaws before production deployment.