CVE-2024-2217
Gaizhenbiao Chuanhuchatgpt 20240121
Raw vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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-2024-2217 is a high-severity Improper Access Control (CWE-284) vulnerability in Gaizhenbiao Chuanhuchatgpt. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, ranked in the top 45% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 Privacy and Disclosure risk domain.
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-2024-27173
Vulnerability Data
gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgpt is vulnerable to improper access control, allowing unauthorized access to the `config.json` file. This vulnerability is present in both authenticated and unauthenticated versions of the application, enabling attackers to obtain sensitive information such as API keys (`openai_api_key`, `google_palm_api_key`, `xmchat_api_key`,…
more
etc.), configuration details, and user credentials. The issue stems from the application's handling of HTTP requests for the `config.json` file, which does not properly restrict access based on user authentication.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- Privacy and Disclosure
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- gaizhenbiao/chuanhuchatgpt is a web-based ChatGPT-like interface/application that integrates with LLM APIs (e.g., OpenAI, Google PaLM), exposing configuration via improper access control; fits Enterprise AI Assistants as it provides an AI chat assistant platform.
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces approved authorizations for logical access, stopping unauthorized actors from reaching resources.
Enforces flow-control policies that restrict information movement between subjects and objects.
Documents duties and assigns access so that no single account can bypass intended restrictions.
Limits each account to the minimum privileges needed, reducing the chance of unauthorized access.
Defines account types, assigns/removes access, and reviews accounts to ensure only authorized actors can reach resources.
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.5.1 only requires that an information security policy and topic-specific policies (including on access control) exist and are reviewed; it does not itself enforce, implement or act on any access restriction, so the weakness can still be exploited (per the owner's explicit rule that governance/dependency clauses score none on effect verbs).
A.5.15 directly mandates determining requirements, defining/implementing topic-specific access control policy+rules (with explicit references to 8.3, 5.16, 5.18), and enforcing authorized access while preventing unauthorized access, which squarely stops exploitation of most CWE-284 instances; the bounded remainder is the physical slice (explicitly delegated to 7.2-7.4) plus any second-order defects like path traversal that are not authorization decisions.
A.5.16's identity lifecycle (unique binding, timely disable/remove, no duplicates, oversight of shared/non-human) directly stops most improper access by ensuring the actor in an access decision is correctly identified and authorized; the bounded remainder is non-identity mechanisms in CWE-284 such as path traversal or CSRF that do not turn on actor identity at all.
A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, adjustment and timely revocation of both physical and logical access rights per business rules, segregation of duties and risk-evaluated changes/terminations; this stops most unauthorized-actor exploitation paths named by CWE-284, with a bounded remainder (e.g. path-traversal or CSRF cases that are not authorization decisions at all)
A.5.2 defines and assigns roles/responsibilities for protection of information and risk acceptance; it does not itself enforce any access decision and cannot stop exploitation of improper access control (per the owner's labeling rule: governance/dependency clauses do not score on prevent/mitigate verbs)
Ongoing audits and performance reviews of suppliers detect and correct situations where access controls or privilege assignments are weaker than contractually required, limiting an attacker's ability to exploit improper access control in the supplier's environment.
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.