Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-24806 is a high-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability in Libuv Libuv. Its CVSS base score is 7.3 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked in the top 20% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) 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-2024-22182
Vulnerability Data
libuv is a multi-platform support library with a focus on asynchronous I/O. The `uv_getaddrinfo` function in `src/unix/getaddrinfo.c` (and its windows counterpart `src/win/getaddrinfo.c`), truncates hostnames to 256 characters before calling `getaddrinfo`. This behavior can be exploited to create addresses like `0x00007f000001`,…
more
which are considered valid by `getaddrinfo` and could allow an attacker to craft payloads that resolve to unintended IP addresses, bypassing developer checks. The vulnerability arises due to how the `hostname_ascii` variable (with a length of 256 bytes) is handled in `uv_getaddrinfo` and subsequently in `uv__idna_toascii`. When the hostname exceeds 256 characters, it gets truncated without a terminating null byte. As a result attackers may be able to access internal APIs or for websites (similar to MySpace) that allows users to have `username.example.com` pages. Internal services that crawl or cache these user pages can be exposed to SSRF attacks if a malicious user chooses a long vulnerable username. This issue has been addressed in release version 1.48.0. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.6V1.5.3V5.3.2V10.4.7
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.
Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.
Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF occurs.
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.
Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.
Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.
Secure development practices directly include input validation and destination allow-listing that prevent SSRF.
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.