Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-21631 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Vapor Vapor. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 46th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-22 (Unsupported System Components) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-0412
Vulnerability Data
Vapor is an HTTP web framework for Swift. Prior to version 4.90.0, Vapor's `vapor_urlparser_parse` function uses `uint16_t` indexes when parsing a URI's components, which may cause integer overflows when parsing untrusted inputs. This vulnerability does not affect Vapor directly but…
more
could impact applications relying on the URI type for validating user input. The URI type is used in several places in Vapor. A developer may decide to use URI to represent a URL in their application (especially if that URL is then passed to the HTTP Client) and rely on its public properties and methods. However, URI may fail to properly parse a valid (albeit abnormally long) URL, due to string ranges being converted to 16-bit integers. An attacker may use this behavior to trick the application into accepting a URL to an untrusted destination. By padding the port number with zeros, an attacker can cause an integer overflow to occur when the URL authority is parsed and, as a result, spoof the host. Version 4.90.0 contains a patch for this issue. As a workaround, validate user input before parsing as a URI or, if possible, use Foundation's `URL` and `URLComponents` utilities.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 7 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V15.1.2V5.2.6
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SA-22 directly requires replacing components once vendor support ends, structurally preventing reliance on unmaintained third-party code.
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.
SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.
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 and enforce input validation during development.
GV.RM-04's high-level risk-response criteria can indirectly discourage unmaintained third-party use via policy, but alone removes none of the concrete supply-chain or maintenance decisions that produce CWE-1104.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
A maintained asset inventory plus scheduled scanning and patching directly reduces the window during which known vulnerable third-party components remain exploitable.
Periodic validation, certification demands, and life-cycle monitoring of supplier components help surface and replace unmaintained third-party elements before they become exploitable liabilities.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
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` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248521 OL 8 must be a vendor-supported release. prevents CWE-1104
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20