CVE-2024-43782
Openedx redwood1 … redwood2
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-43782 is a high-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Openedx Openedx. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 44th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-40448
Vulnerability Data
This openedx-translations repository contains translation files from Open edX repositories to be kept in sync with Transifex. Before moving to pulling translations from the openedx-translations repository via openedx-atlas, translations in the edx-platform repository were validated using edx-i18n-tools. This validation included…
more
protection against malformed translations and translations-based script injections. Prior to this patch, the validation implemented in the openedx-translations repository did not include the same protections. The maintainer inspected the translations in the edx-platform directory of both the main and open-release/redwood.master branches of the openedx-translations repository and found no evidence of exploited translation strings.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
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.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
A.8.25 mandates a secure SDLC process that includes secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing (scans/penetration), and developer training to reduce injection flaws, but does not itself enforce or guarantee neutralization of special elements at runtime.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (including distrust external input, data validation/sanitization, secure architecture layers, and design reviews against attack patterns) that reach injection when applied to output construction; this stops exploitation for a minority slice (e.g. where principles drive sanitization) but leaves most code-level injection defects untouched without further implementation rigor.
Secure coding standards require proper neutralization of special elements, directly addressing CWE-74.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-74, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.