Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-4177

SSRF in Bitdefender Gravityzone ≤ 6.38.1-2

Published
06 June 2024
Modified
21 November 2024
CVSS Score v3.1 8.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0043 36th percentile
Risk Priority 59 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-4177 is a high-severity Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output (CWE-116) vulnerability in Bitdefender Gravityzone. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked at the 36th 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 AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A host whitelist parser issue in the proxy service implemented in the GravityZone Update Server allows an attacker to cause a server-side request forgery. This issue only affects GravityZone Console versions before 6.38.1-2 that are running only on premise.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
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.
T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-2243Same product: Bitdefender Gravityzone
CVE-2024-6980Same product: Bitdefender Gravityzone
CVE-2025-2244Same product: Bitdefender Gravityzone
CVE-2025-2245Same vendor: Bitdefender
CVE-2024-2224Same vendor: Bitdefender
CVE-2024-2223Same vendor: Bitdefender
CVE-2023-3633Same vendor: Bitdefender
CVE-2026-10047Same vendor: Bitdefender
CVE-2026-10046Same vendor: Bitdefender
CVE-2024-13871Same vendor: Bitdefender

Affected Assets

bitdefender
gravityzone
≤ 6.38.1-2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.1.2
  • V1.2.1
  • V1.2.3
  • V1.3.6

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.

Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.

Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF occurs.

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 proper output encoding to prevent injection and message malformation.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.

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

Secure coding standards explicitly require correct output encoding and escaping to preserve message structure.

finds

Security testing can detect missing or incorrect encoding but does not itself implement the control.

prevents

Operational threat data describing SSRF campaigns can be used to tighten outbound-request allow-lists and detection rules before attackers exploit them.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates output encoding/escaping practices that directly prevent improper encoding.

prevents

Application security requirements include explicit rules for safe output handling and encoding.

prevents

Secure architecture principles reduce the likelihood of missing encoding but do not prescribe the actual technique.

References