CVE-2024-32047
Cyberpower Powerpanel ≤ 4.9.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-32047 is a critical-severity Active Debug Code (CWE-489) vulnerability in Cyberpower Powerpanel. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 41th 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 CM-2 (Baseline Configuration) and CM-7 (Least Functionality) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-34459
Vulnerability Data
Hard-coded credentials for the CyberPower PowerPanel test server can be found in the production code. This might result in an attacker gaining access to the testing or production server.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Baseline configuration defines the approved production state that must exclude active debug code.
Least functionality explicitly prohibits enabling unnecessary debug or diagnostic features in production builds.
Documented development standards and tools can require removal of debug code before release.
Security-integrated SDLC processes ensure debug artifacts are stripped prior to deployment.
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 require removal of debug code before release, covering most of this weakness while the control addresses many other development issues.
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 catches active debug code before deployment.
Configuration management can disable or remove debug features through hardened baselines.
Secure development life cycle mandates removal of debug code before release.
Secure coding standards explicitly prohibit leaving debug code active in production.
Separation of environments reduces risk of debug code reaching production but does not directly address its removal.
Change management can enforce removal of debug code as part of release gates.