CVE-2024-20923
Oracle Graalvm 20.3.12 … 21.3.8
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/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-2024-20923 is a low-severity Protection Mechanism Failure (CWE-693) vulnerability in Oracle Graalvm. Its CVSS base score is 3.1 (Low).
Operationally, ranked at the 48th 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-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-18638
Vulnerability Data
Vulnerability in the Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition product of Oracle Java SE (component: JavaFX). Supported versions that are affected are Oracle Java SE: 8u391; Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition: 20.3.12 and 21.3.8. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated…
more
attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition accessible data. Note: This vulnerability applies to Java deployments, typically in clients running sandboxed Java Web Start applications or sandboxed Java applets, that load and run untrusted code (e.g., code that comes from the internet) and rely on the Java sandbox for security. This vulnerability does not apply to Java deployments, typically in servers, that load and run only trusted code (e.g., code installed by an administrator). CVSS 3.1 Base Score 3.1 (Confidentiality impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
AC-3 directly requires enforcement of access authorizations via the protection mechanism itself.
AC-4 mandates use of information flow enforcement mechanisms to control data movement.
SC-2 requires separation of user and system functionality as a protection mechanism.
SC-28 requires protection mechanisms for information at rest.
SC-3 requires isolation of security functions from non-security functions.
SC-7 requires boundary protection mechanisms to monitor and control external communications.
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.
Systematic verification that security mechanisms operate according to defined standards reduces the likelihood that protection mechanisms are bypassed or disabled.
A.8.26 only requires that security requirements (including protection mechanisms) be identified and specified during development or acquisition; it does not itself mandate, implement, or enforce the mechanisms that would remove CWE-693 instances from the product.
A.8.28 mandates secure coding practices, principles, standards, design, peer review, defect removal, prohibition of insecure techniques (e.g. hard-coded passwords), and evaluation of common errors before deployment, which directly removes many instances of missing or incorrectly used protection mechanisms from first-party code; the bounded remainder is third-party components and post-deployment issues handled by other clauses (8.8, 8.29).
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.