CVE-2024-32001
Authzed Spicedb ≤ 1.30.1
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-32001 is a low-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability in Authzed Spicedb. Its CVSS base score is 2.2 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 45th 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 SC-24 (Fail in Known State) and SI-17 (Fail-safe Procedures) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-1231
Vulnerability Data
SpiceDB is a graph database purpose-built for storing and evaluating access control data. Use of a relation of the form: `relation folder: folder | folder#parent` with an arrow such as `folder->view` can cause LookupSubjects to only return the subjects found…
more
under subjects for either `folder` or `folder#parent`. This bug only manifests if the same subject type is used multiple types in a relation, relationships exist for both subject types and an arrow is used over the relation. Any user making a negative authorization decision based on the results of a LookupSubjects request with version before v1.30.1 is affected. Version 1.30.1 contains a patch for the issue. As a workaround, avoid using LookupSubjects for negative authorization decisions and/or avoid using the broken schema.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires the system to fail to a known safe state on specified failures, limiting the impact of unhandled exceptional conditions.
Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures triggered by indicated failures, structurally preventing unhandled or mishandled exceptional conditions.
Requires generation of appropriate error messages on exceptional conditions, directly enforcing correct handling rather than silent or incorrect 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 explicitly require proper exception and error handling during design and coding.
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 verifies correct handling of exceptional conditions.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling requirements and testing that directly prevent improper handling of exceptional conditions.
Application security requirements explicitly include handling of error and exceptional conditions.