CVE-2024-30246
Enalean Tuleap 14.11.99.34 – 15.7.99.6
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:LSummary
CVE-2024-30246 is a high-severity Expected Behavior Violation (CWE-440) vulnerability in Enalean Tuleap. Its CVSS base score is 7.6 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 47th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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-6 (Security and Privacy Function Verification) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-28177
Vulnerability Data
Tuleap is an Open Source Suite to improve management of software developments and collaboration. A malicious user could exploit this issue on purpose to delete information on the instance or possibly gain access to restricted artifacts. It is however not…
more
possible to control exactly which information is deleted. Information from theDate, File, Float, Int, List, OpenList, Text, and Permissions on artifact (this one can lead to the disclosure of restricted information) fields can be impacted. This vulnerability is fixed in Tuleap Community Edition version 15.7.99.6 and Tuleap Enterprise Edition 15.7-2, 15.6-5, 15.5-6, 15.4-8, 15.3-6, 15.2-5, 15.1-9, 15.0-9, and 14.12-6.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V9.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly checks whether implemented functions match their specifications.
Security function verification confirms that functions operate according to their defined expected behavior.
Requiring a documented development process and supporting tools reduces the chance that incorrect control-flow logic is introduced in the first place.
Requiring a documented security architecture and design reduces the chance that implementation deviates from intended behavior.
Flaw identification and remediation processes can locate and correct control-flow errors once they manifest as incorrect runtime behavior.
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 directly enforce specification compliance and catch expected-behavior violations during development.
Security testing and exercises help discover behavior deviations before deployment.
Vulnerability identification can surface spec-violating flaws, while eliminating the weakness reduces some vulnerability backlog.
Routine software maintenance and patching can remediate discovered specification violations.
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 in development and acceptance validates that functions behave as specified.
Secure development life cycle mandates verification against specifications, directly reducing expected-behavior violations.
Application security requirements explicitly define expected behavior that must be met.
Secure coding practices enforce adherence to functional specifications during implementation.
Change management can catch specification deviations introduced by modifications.
Documented operating procedures reduce the chance that functions deviate from intended behavior.