Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-27918

Coder ≤ 2.6.1

Published
21 March 2024
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 8.2
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0097 59th percentile
Risk Priority 63 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-27918 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Coder Coder. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 41% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Coder allows oragnizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.6.1, 2.7.3, and 2.8.4, a vulnerability in Coder's OIDC authentication could allow an attacker to bypass the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` verification and create an account with an email not…

more

in the allowlist. Deployments are only affected if the OIDC provider allows users to create accounts on the provider. During OIDC registration, the user's email was improperly validated against the allowed `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN`s. This could allow a user with a domain that only partially matched an allowed domain to successfully login or register. An attacker could register a domain name that exploited this vulnerability and register on a Coder instance with a public OIDC provider. Coder instances with OIDC enabled and protected by the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` configuration are affected. Coder instances using a private OIDC provider are not affected, as arbitrary users cannot register through a private OIDC provider without first having an account on the provider. Public OIDC providers are impacted. GitHub authentication and external authentication are not impacted. This vulnerability is remedied in versions 2.8.4, 2.7.3, and 2.6.1 All versions prior to these patches are affected by the vulnerability.*It is recommended that customers upgrade their deployments as soon as possible if they are utilizing OIDC authentication with the `CODER_OIDC_EMAIL_DOMAIN` setting.

CWE(s)
CWE-20

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

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.
attack.mitre.org →
T1036.001 Invalid Code Signature Stealth
Adversaries may attempt to mimic features of valid code signatures to increase the chance of deceiving a user, analyst, or tool.
attack.mitre.org →
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
attack.mitre.org →
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-55433Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55432Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55076Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-45796Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55429Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55077Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55428Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55427Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55437Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-44454Same product: Coder Coder

Affected Assets

coder
coder
≤ 2.6.1 · 2.7.0 — 2.7.3 · 2.8.0 — 2.8.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

—

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.

SI-10 Information Input Validation good match

SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.

SA-15 Development Process, Standards, and Tools partial match

Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.

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-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require and enforce input validation during development.

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

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.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

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.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

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.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

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.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

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.

A.8.7 Protection against malware none match
none

Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.

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

References