CVE-2024-45304
Openzeppelin Contracts ≤ 0.16.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-45304 is a medium-severity Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation (CWE-670) vulnerability in Openzeppelin Contracts. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 39th 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-41428
Vulnerability Data
Cairo-Contracts are OpenZeppelin Contracts written in Cairo for Starknet, a decentralized ZK Rollup. This vulnerability can lead to unauthorized ownership transfer, contrary to the original owner's intention of leaving the contract without an owner. It introduces a security risk where…
more
an unintended party (pending owner) can gain control of the contract after the original owner has renounced ownership. This could also be used by a malicious owner to simulate leaving a contract without an owner, to later regain ownership by previously having proposed himself as a pending owner. This issue has been addressed in release version 0.16.0. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- 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 at post-design stages directly exercises control-flow paths and reveals mismatches between implemented and intended behavior.
Requiring a documented development process and supporting tools reduces the chance that incorrect control-flow logic is introduced in the first place.
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 prevent incorrect control-flow implementations via reviews, testing, and static analysis.
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 can detect paths that deviate from intended logic.
Secure development lifecycle processes can catch incorrect control-flow logic during design and code review.
Secure coding standards and reviews directly target flawed control-flow implementations.
Change-management gates may prevent deployment of flawed logic but do not address the coding defect itself.