Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-47804

Memory Safety in Jenkins ≤ 2.462.3

Published
02 October 2024
Modified
14 March 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 4.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0067 49th percentile
Risk Priority 38 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-47804 is a medium-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Jenkins Jenkins. Its CVSS base score is 4.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 49th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

If an attempt is made to create an item of a type prohibited by `ACL#hasCreatePermission2` or `TopLevelItemDescriptor#isApplicableIn(ItemGroup)` through the Jenkins CLI or the REST API and either of these checks fail, Jenkins 2.478 and earlier, LTS 2.462.2 and earlier creates…

more

the item in memory, only deleting it from disk, allowing attackers with Item/Configure permission to save the item to persist it, effectively bypassing the item creation restriction.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
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.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-53435Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2025-31721Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2025-31720Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2025-59475Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2026-53438Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2025-67636Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2024-43045Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2026-53439Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2025-59474Same product: Jenkins Jenkins
CVE-2023-27899Same product: Jenkins Jenkins

Affected Assets

jenkins
jenkins
≤ 2.462.3 · ≤ 2.479

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)
  • V1.5.2
  • V3.2.3
  • V15.3.5

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and type-aware analysis) directly finds type-confusion flaws before deployment.

Engineering principles can require use of type-safe languages, static typing, and runtime type checks that structurally avoid allocating one type and accessing another.

Memory-protection controls limit the blast radius when a type-confusion access occurs but do not stop the flaw itself.

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 prevent type-confusion flaws via safe typing, static analysis, and code review while the control itself addresses many additional weaknesses.

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.

finds

Security testing in development can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.

prevents

Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.

References