Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-25108

Access Control in Pixelfed 0.10.4 – 0.11.11

Public PoCAccess Control
Published
12 February 2024
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 9.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0068 50th percentile
Risk Priority 70 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

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 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 AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

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 Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
T1548.001 Setuid and Setgid Privilege Escalation
An adversary may abuse configurations where an application has the setuid or setgid bits set in order to get code running in a different (and possibly more privileged) user’s context.
T1548.002 Bypass User Account Control Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may bypass UAC mechanisms to elevate process privileges on system.
T1548.003 Sudo and Sudo Caching Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may perform sudo caching and/or use the sudoers file to elevate privileges.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-0914Same product: Pixelfed Pixelfed
CVE-2023-0901Same product: Pixelfed Pixelfed
CVE-2023-2782Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2025-29827Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2026-15318Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2023-27594Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2024-47183Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2024-38425Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2023-36826Shared CWE-285, CWE-863
CVE-2026-16122Shared CWE-285, CWE-863

Affected Assets

pixelfed
pixelfed
0.10.4 — 0.11.11

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 17 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V6.2.2
  • V8.3.3

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Mandates that access-control decisions are made and applied to each request before access occurs.

Requires a tamperproof, always-invoked reference monitor that performs authorization checks.

Directly requires enforcement of approved authorizations for every access request, stopping improper or missing checks.

Limits granted privileges so that even a bypassed check affects fewer resources.

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.

PR.AA-05 mostly match
prevents

Defining, enforcing and reviewing access permissions with least privilege directly prevents code paths that mishandle insufficient privileges.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

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.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of software and data surfaces adverse events triggered by unhandled permission failures.

PR.AA-01 partial match
prevents

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.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

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.

PR.PS-04 partial match
prevents

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.

finds

Security testing can detect missing or incorrect privilege handling.

prevents

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.

prevents

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.

prevents

Defines access-control policy that should prevent insufficient-privilege situations.

degrades

Specifies how access rights are granted, reviewed and revoked, directly addressing privilege handling.

finds

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 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 (4 rules)
  • V-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285, CWE-863
  • V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285, CWE-863
  • V-248548 OL 8 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
RHEL 7 (3 rules)
  • V-204429 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
  • V-204430 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must re-authenticate for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285, CWE-863
  • V-251704 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
  • V-251712 The RHEL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285, CWE-863
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
  • V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
  • V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-280

References