CVE-2024-27135
Apache Pulsar 2.4.0 – 2.10.6
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-27135 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Apache Pulsar. Its CVSS base score is 8.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Reflective Code Loading (T1620); ranked in the top 7% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-1046
Vulnerability Data
Improper input validation in the Pulsar Function Worker allows a malicious authenticated user to execute arbitrary Java code on the Pulsar Function worker, outside of the sandboxes designated for running user-provided functions. This vulnerability also applies to the Pulsar Broker…
more
when it is configured with "functionsWorkerEnabled=true". This issue affects Apache Pulsar versions from 2.4.0 to 2.10.5, from 2.11.0 to 2.11.3, from 3.0.0 to 3.0.2, from 3.1.0 to 3.1.2, and 3.2.0. 2.10 Pulsar Function Worker users should upgrade to at least 2.10.6. 2.11 Pulsar Function Worker users should upgrade to at least 2.11.4. 3.0 Pulsar Function Worker users should upgrade to at least 3.0.3. 3.1 Pulsar Function Worker users should upgrade to at least 3.1.3. 3.2 Pulsar Function Worker users should upgrade to at least 3.2.1. Users operating versions prior to those listed above should upgrade to the aforementioned patched versions or newer versions.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 8 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement directly stops unauthorized reads/writes to dynamic code resources by applying authorization checks at access time.
Least privilege reduces the set of subjects that can reach or modify dynamic code resources, limiting the weakness's reach.
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.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
Isolating security functions from non-security code prevents unintended manipulation of dynamically managed executable 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.
Secure SDLC practices explicitly include controls that prevent improper handling of dynamic code resources.
Blocking unauthorized code execution directly limits the ability to abuse dynamically-managed resources.
Runtime-environment monitoring can detect exploitation of the weakness but does not prevent it.
Vulnerability identification can surface instances of CWE-913 but does not mitigate the root weakness.
Hardened configuration baselines can restrict dynamic code execution and variable access at runtime.
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.
Environment separation reduces exposure of dynamic code resources but does not address the underlying weakness.
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
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220726 Data Execution Prevention (DEP) must be configured to at least OptOut. prevents CWE-913
Windows 11 (1 rule)
- V-253283 Data Execution Prevention (DEP) must be configured to at least OptOut. prevents CWE-913