Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-9606

Litellm ≤ 1.44.12

Public PoC
Published
20 March 2025
Modified
07 April 2025
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0071 50th percentile
Risk Priority 58 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-9606 is a high-severity Improper Output Neutralization for Logs (CWE-117) vulnerability in Litellm Litellm. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked in the top 50% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

CVE-2024-9606 is a logging vulnerability in the berriai/litellm Python library, specifically affecting versions before 1.44.12, with the issue confirmed in v1.44.9. Located in the file `litellm/litellm_core_utils/litellm_logging.py`, the flaw stems from API key masking logic that obscures only the first five characters of the key, resulting in logs that expose nearly the entire secret. This improper output neutralization (CWE-116) and improper encoding (CWE-117) carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N), highlighting high confidentiality impact.

The vulnerability enables exploitation by any attacker who gains access to the application's logs, such as through log aggregation systems, shared storage, or compromised logging endpoints. No privileges, user interaction, or special conditions are required beyond log visibility, which is often granted to developers, operators, or external monitoring services. Successful exploitation allows extraction of almost complete API keys, potentially granting unauthorized access to downstream services proxied by LiteLLM, such as LLM providers, leading to unauthorized API usage, data exfiltration, or further compromise.

Mitigation is addressed in the GitHub commit 9094071c4782183e84f10630e2450be3db55509a, which fixes the masking logic in LiteLLM version 1.44.12 and later. Security practitioners should upgrade affected installations immediately and review historical logs for exposed keys. The issue was reported via Huntr (bounty ID 4a03796f-a8d4-4293-84ef-d3959456223a), emphasizing proactive auditing of logging mechanisms in LLM proxy deployments.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 InjectionA09:2025 Security Logging and Alerting Failures

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In berriai/litellm before version 1.44.12, the `litellm/litellm_core_utils/litellm_logging.py` file contains a vulnerability where the API key masking code only masks the first 5 characters of the key. This results in the leakage of almost the entire API key in the logs,…

more

exposing a significant amount of the secret key. The issue affects version v1.44.9.

CWE(s)
CWE-117CWE-116

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.
attack.mitre.org →
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.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
attack.mitre.org →
T1070 Indicator Removal Stealth
Adversaries may selectively delete or modify artifacts generated to reduce indications of their presence and blend in with legitimate activity.
attack.mitre.org →
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-45809Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2024-6825Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-40217Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-47101Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-12795Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-47102Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-12797Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-12771Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-12799Same product: Litellm Litellm
CVE-2026-12770Same product: Litellm Litellm

Affected Assets

litellm
litellm
≤ 1.44.12

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

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect output neutralization when log messages are constructed from untrusted input.

SI-10 Information Input Validation partial match

Input validation reduces the chance that specially crafted data reaches log-message construction routines.

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 and coding standards directly require output sanitization for logs.

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.

A.8.28 Secure coding mostly match
prevents

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

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing can detect log injection flaws but does not prevent them at the source.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
degrades

Logging control directly requires proper log generation and handling, which mitigates improper output neutralization.

A.8.16 Monitoring activities partial match
finds

Monitoring activities rely on trustworthy logs but do not ensure log message integrity.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC includes coding standards that reduce log-related weaknesses but does not specifically address logging.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

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

References