Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2024-25108 is a critical-severity Improper Handling of Insufficient Permissions or Privileges (CWE-280) vulnerability in Pixelfed Pixelfed. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 49th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-0638
Vulnerability Data
Pixelfed is an open source photo sharing platform. When processing requests authorization was improperly and insufficiently checked, allowing attackers to access far more functionality than users intended, including to the administrative and moderator functionality of the Pixelfed server. This vulnerability…
more
affects every version of Pixelfed between v0.10.4 and v0.11.9, inclusive. A proof of concept of this vulnerability exists. This vulnerability affects every local user of a Pixelfed server, and can potentially affect the servers' ability to federate. Some user interaction is required to setup the conditions to be able to exercise the vulnerability, but the attacker could conduct this attack time-delayed manner, where user interaction is not actively required. This vulnerability has been addressed in version 0.11.11. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
CVE-2024-25108 is an improper authorization vulnerability in Pixelfed's public-facing API that allows low-privilege (read-scope) access tokens to perform elevated administrative and moderator actions, enabling exploitation of a public-facing application (T1190) and exploitation for privilege escalation (T1068).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 17 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
V6.2.2V8.3.3
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Documented procedures facilitate correct implementation and ongoing management of authorization decisions.
Periodic reviews identify and correct flaws in authorization decisions or enforcement.
Establishing permitted attributes and values, plus auditing changes, ensures authorization decisions are based on correctly managed policy data.
Explicitly mandates authorizing remote access types before permitting connections, directly mitigating improper authorization.
The control explicitly requires authorization of each wireless access type prior to permitting connections.
Mandating explicit authorization of mobile device connections reduces the risk of improper authorization decisions for system access.
Specifying access authorizations for each account and requiring approvals for account requests enforces proper authorization decisions.
Requires explicit authorization for individuals to use external systems to access or handle organization-controlled information.
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.
Defining, enforcing and reviewing access permissions with least privilege directly prevents code paths that mishandle insufficient privileges.
Secure SDLC practices catch and eliminate most authorization defects before release, yet a single broad outcome cannot address every design, role, and runtime facet of CWE-285.
Runtime monitoring of software and data surfaces adverse events triggered by unhandled permission failures.
PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities and access-request workflows that can support downstream authorization decisions, yet does nothing to enforce or verify authorization checks inside a product, leaving CWE-285 fully unaddressed by this control alone.
Network segmentation/zero-trust limits external reachability (partial prevention of exploitation) but leaves application-level authorization logic untouched, so the CWE remains fully introducible and only one facet of its risk is addressed.
Generating logs of permission-related events enables detection and analysis of improper handling.
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.
Security testing can detect missing or incorrect privilege handling.
Granular, policy-driven assignment of permissions and dynamic enforcement of those permissions prevent the incorrect or missing authorization decisions that lead to improper authorization flaws.
By requiring documented authorization rules and periodic policy reviews, the control makes it less likely that authorization decisions will be omitted or implemented inconsistently across applications.
Defines access-control policy that should prevent insufficient-privilege situations.
Specifies how access rights are granted, reviewed and revoked, directly addressing privilege handling.
Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that reduce the attack surface for weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Derived transitively via CVE→CWE→STIG over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248548 OL 8 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. via CWE-280