Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-23634 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Geoserver Geoserver. Its CVSS base score is 6.0 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked at the 50th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-0853
Vulnerability Data
GeoServer is an open source software server written in Java that allows users to share and edit geospatial data. An arbitrary file renaming vulnerability exists in versions prior to 2.23.5 and 2.24.2 that enables an authenticated administrator with permissions to…
more
modify stores through the REST Coverage Store or Data Store API to rename arbitrary files and directories with a name that does not end in `.zip`. Store file uploads rename zip files to have a `.zip` extension if it doesn't already have one before unzipping the file. This is fine for file and url upload methods where the files will be in a specific subdirectory of the data directory but, when using the external upload method, this allows arbitrary files and directories to be renamed. Renaming GeoServer files will most likely result in a denial of service, either completely preventing GeoServer from running or effectively deleting specific resources (such as a workspace, layer or style). In some cases, renaming GeoServer files could revert to the default settings for that file which could be relatively harmless like removing contact information or have more serious consequences like allowing users to make OGC requests that the customized settings would have prevented them from making. The impact of renaming non-GeoServer files depends on the specific environment although some sort of denial of service is a likely outcome. Versions 2.23.5 and 2.24.2 contain a fix for this issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V5.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
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.
Enforces authorization checks on the actual resource accessed, blocking unauthorized files even when a malicious path is supplied.
Least-privilege limits the set of files or directories any subject can affect, shrinking the blast radius of a path-control flaw.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
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.
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.
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.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Information access restriction limits which files can be reached, indirectly reducing impact of path manipulation.
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).
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