Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-27264

LPE in Ibm I 7.2 … 7.5

Published
22 May 2024
Modified
30 June 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.4
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0014 4th percentile
Risk Priority 55 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-27264 is a high-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Ibm I. Its CVSS base score is 7.4 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 4th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

IBM Performance Tools for i 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5 could allow a local user to gain elevated privileges due to an unqualified library call. A malicious actor could cause user-controlled code to run with administrator privilege. IBM X-Force ID:…

more

284563.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-40378Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-40375Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-40377Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-40685Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-40686Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-30988Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-30989Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2023-38721Same product: Ibm I
CVE-2026-6389Same vendor: Ibm
CVE-2023-47715Same vendor: Ibm

Affected Assets

ibm
i
7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 24 hardening rules · 9 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V10.3.5

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.

The access control policy and procedures directly mandate and enforce proper access control mechanisms across the organization.

Implements core proper privilege management by restricting to only required rights.

Baseline includes documented access control settings that are reviewed and maintained, reducing the ability to exploit improper access control.

Requiring the most restrictive settings instead of defaults prevents incorrect default permissions on resources.

Explicitly requires protecting the configuration management plan from unauthorized disclosure and modification.

The policy defines and enforces restrictions on physical access to resources, directly reducing improper access control.

Tailoring explicitly overrides or scopes default permission assignments in the baseline to match the system's actual risk and operational needs.

Central management enforces consistent access-control policies across systems, reducing the likelihood of missing or inconsistent enforcement.

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.PS-01 full match
prevents

Hardened baselines and configuration management explicitly require correct default file permissions.

PR.AA-05 mostly match
prevents

PR.AA-05 enforces least privilege/SoD and periodic reviews that directly remove most privilege-assignment defects, yet CWE-269 also covers escalation paths and role design outside a single access-management control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices catch most access-control defects during design/coding/testing (mostly), yet leave residual risk from runtime configuration, architecture, and operational controls (partial).

ID.AM-08 partial match
prevents

Lifecycle management can encompass permission settings, yet the control is too broad to specifically mitigate incorrect defaults.

PR.AA-01 partial match
prevents

PR.AA-01 supplies credential/identity lifecycle support that can reduce some privilege-assignment errors but does not itself assign, modify, or check privileges, leaving most of CWE-269's risk unaddressed.

PR.AA-03 partial match
prevents

Authentication directly blocks unauthenticated actors (partial prevention of CWE-284) but leaves authorization logic, policy enforcement, and role checks untouched, so the control neither eliminates nor fully mitigates the broader weakness.

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.

prevents

Defining and enforcing explicit access rights and restrictions for each entity directly stops the assignment of permissions that exceed what is required, eliminating the root condition that allows improper access control.

prevents

Formal authorization, role-based provisioning, and timely revocation of access rights directly stop the creation of accounts or permissions that exceed what the business actually needs.

prevents

By enforcing explicit rules on which identities or groups may perform read, write, delete or execute operations and by denying anonymous access to sensitive data, the control directly stops the creation of overly permissive or missing access-control checks.

prevents

Requiring one-to-one mapping of identities to entities and timely removal of unused identities directly stops attackers from leveraging stale or shared accounts to bypass access restrictions.

prevents

By explicitly transferring security roles and responsibilities when personnel change jobs or leave, the control reduces the chance that former employees retain access rights they no longer need, thereby limiting improper access control.

prevents

Physical entry controls enforce explicit authorization and authentication at every access point, directly stopping unauthorized actors from reaching information-processing assets.

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).

Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
  • V-224833 Permissions for program file directories must conform to minimum requirements. via CWE-276
Windows Server 2019 (2 rules)
  • V-205735 Windows Server 2019 permissions for program file directories must conform to minimum requirements. via CWE-276
  • V-205736 Windows Server 2019 permissions for the Windows installation directory must conform to minimum requirements. via CWE-276
Windows Server 2022 (2 rules)
  • V-254252 Windows Server 2022 permissions for program file directories must conform to minimum requirements. via CWE-276
  • V-254253 Windows Server 2022 permissions for the Windows installation directory must conform to minimum requirements. via CWE-276

References