vciy

CVE-2024-29018

INDEX BUILT · 2026-09-20

No source can show you its own past. This one can.

Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.

External DNS requests from 'internal' networks could lead to data exfiltration

CVE-2024-290184 of 4 sources documented this
24

rank 24 = 0 + 19 + 0 + 5 + 0

rank@v1 · backlog

Someone is already using it

CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS

EPSS 0.00750  ·  without this subject the record ranks 24

What it costs you if it fires

NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own

CVSS 7.5, from NVD  ·  without this subject the record ranks 5

It is getting worse, not staying still

FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed

no persisting rise in 365 days  ·  without this subject the record ranks 24

How much of the world it touches

NVD CPE configurations

3 products in the CPE ranges  ·  without this subject the record ranks 19

Someone else already set the date

CISA KEV remediation due date

no CISA due date  ·  without this subject the record ranks 24

Unaudited dollar value2 of 3 inputs carry a receipt
Exposure$22,900over the next 30 days, if this record is yours
Movementno material movementthe record holds only daily drift and scoring model releases
Basisassumeda published average, not your estate

$22,900 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.6121449559255632 exposure x 0.0075 likelihood

udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run

$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.

Hindsight · the state

0.0075EPSSNOT IN KEVas of 2026-09-20
Severity5.9 MEDIUMreceipt
Harmunauthenticated · networkreceipt
Exploitationnone in held sources
Defenseunaffected versions publishedreceipt
Movementscoring model changedreceipt
PLATEAU10Minimal movement since 2024-03-21, 816 days at 0.01, as of 2026-06-15. arc-rules@v1

Foresight · where to check next

Pulse SecureLinux29018

This record is one instance of CWE-669, incorrect resource transfer between spheres. The index holds 115 prior instances of this class, 2 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. taxonomy@v1

Full pattern panel

Prior records in this weakness class. Each is its own record, dated and receipted.
Color is a claim, not decoration:the hostile worldthe defenseno signalspoke length is how much of the record matches, not how bad it is

Sources disagree here.

Severity score
GitHub_M5.9 MEDIUMreceipt
NVD7.5 HIGHreceipt

Both shown, dated. We don't pick winners. disagreement-rules@v1

Running moby? Check your version

A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.

Watch this record

Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.

What counts as a move

Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)

Record your call

Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.

AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigated

Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.

Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.

Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness

Written for the ticket you're about to file.

Reachnetwork-reachable · no privileges required · no user interaction · high attack complexityreceipt
ImpactComplete confidentiality lossreceipt
Scored fromCVSS v3.1 · the CNA's vectorreceipt
Weakness classCWE-669 Incorrect Resource Transfer Between Spheresreceipt
Published consequencesCWE-669: Confidentiality, Integrity: Read Application Data, Modify Application Data, Unexpected State[email protected]

CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA

The fix, and how long it's been waiting.

First unaffected version, by branchmoby 23.0.11; moby 25.0.5receipt
Patch available sinceNo dated patch-availability record in held sources. The index holds reference URLs without dates and only the current revision of the CVE record, so the day a fix first existed cannot be derived. Only the versions it landed in.

Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score

Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.

  • RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
  • RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
  • RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
  • RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known

Authority who says so

CVSS, the CNA5.9 MEDIUMreceipt
CVSS, NVD7.5 HIGHreceipt
Exploit probability0.0075 · top 47% of all CVEsreceipt
Blast breadth1 product across 1 vendorderived
Assigned byGitHub_Mreceipt
Recorded changes17 · last 19 Sep 2026derived

Affected & Fixed Versions as published

Affected productmobyreceipt
Published rangesmobyproject moby < 23.0.11; mobyproject moby >= 24.0.0 < 25.0.5; mobyproject moby 26.0.0receipt

A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.

Did this affect your environment?Answering needs an account.

Attack path

Unauthenticated network requestno credentials, no interactionmobyCWE-669 weaknessConfidentiality lossC:Hexploits CWE-669data compromise

What it is stated by the CNA

Moby is an open source container framework that is a key component of Docker Engine, Docker Desktop, and other distributions of container tooling or runtimes. Moby's networking implementation allows for many networks, each with their own IP address range and gateway, to be defined. This feature is frequently referred to as custom networks, as each network can have a different driver, set of parameters and thus behaviors. When creating a network, the `--internal` flag is used to designate a network as _internal_. receipt

Read the rest of the CNA's description

The `internal` attribute in a docker-compose.yml file may also be used to mark a network _internal_, and other API clients may specify the `internal` parameter as well. When containers with networking are created, they are assigned unique network interfaces and IP addresses. The host serves as a router for non-internal networks, with a gateway IP that provides SNAT/DNAT to/from container IPs. Containers on an internal network may communicate between each other, but are precluded from communicating with any networks the host has access to (LAN or WAN) as no default route is configured, and firewall rules are set up to drop all outgoing traffic. Communication with the gateway IP address (and thus appropriately configured host services) is possible, and the host may communicate with any container IP directly. In addition to configuring the Linux kernel's various networking features to enable container networking, `dockerd` directly provides some services to container networks. Principal among these is serving as a resolver, enabling service discovery, and resolution of names from an upstream resolver. When a DNS request for a name that does not correspond to a container is received, the request is forwarded to the configured upstream resolver. This request is made from the container's network namespace: the level of access and routing of traffic is the same as if the request was made by the container itself. As a consequence of this design, containers solely attached to an internal network will be unable to resolve names using the upstream resolver, as the container itself is unable to communicate with that nameserver. Only the names of containers also attached to the internal network are able to be resolved. Many systems run a local forwarding DNS resolver. As the host and any containers have separate loopback devices, a consequence of the design described above is that containers are unable to resolve names from the host's configured resolver, as they cannot reach these addresses on the host loopback device. To bridge this gap, and to allow containers to properly resolve names even when a local forwarding resolver is used on a loopback address, `dockerd` detects this scenario and instead forward DNS requests from the host namework namespace. The loopback resolver then forwards the requests to its configured upstream resolvers, as expected. Because `dockerd` forwards DNS requests to the host loopback device, bypassing the container network namespace's normal routing semantics entirely, internal networks can unexpectedly forward DNS requests to an external nameserver. By registering a domain for which they control the authoritative nameservers, an attacker could arrange for a compromised container to exfiltrate data by encoding it in DNS queries that will eventually be answered by their nameservers. Docker Desktop is not affected, as Docker Desktop always runs an internal resolver on a RFC 1918 address. Moby releases 26.0.0, 25.0.4, and 23.0.11 are patched to prevent forwarding any DNS requests from internal networks. As a workaround, run containers intended to be solely attached to internal networks with a custom upstream address, which will force all upstream DNS queries to be resolved from the container's network namespace.

NVD's analysis a second authority

severity
7.5 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
weakness
CWE-669
affected versions
mobyproject moby < 23.0.11; mobyproject moby >= 24.0.0 < 25.0.5; mobyproject moby 26.0.0
also scored by
[email protected] 5.9 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

The CNA scored it 5.9 and NVD 7.5. Both are shown because both were published; we do not pick one.

check it yourself github.com github.com receipt

Movement the material steps

21 Mar 20240.00043
17 Mar 20250.0025 · scoring model v2025.03.14
15 Jun 20260.0075 · scoring model v2026.06.15

This score more than doubled inside 72 hours. Both observations are in the full history below.

Show all 17 observations
21 Mar 20240.00043
17 Mar 20250.0025
26 Mar 20250.00055
27 Mar 20250.00187
28 Mar 20250.00051
29 Mar 20250.00172
30 Mar 20250.00051
10 Apr 20250.00048
27 Apr 20250.00066
28 Apr 20250.00143
9 Aug 20250.00194
5 Nov 20250.00222
18 Nov 20250.00298
21 Nov 20250.00222
4 Mar 20260.00264
8 Apr 20260.00357
15 Jun 20260.0075

17 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt

The full biography

EPSS 0.0075Published2024-03-20Index as of2026-06-15

Exploit probability more than doubled between 2025-03-26 and 2025-03-27 (0.00055 → 0.00187) and the record had been public for 2 years, 2 months when this index was last written.

Published 2024-03-20 receipt · Index as of 2026-06-15 derived

The pattern, elsewhere

This record is one instance of CWE-669, incorrect resource transfer between spheres. The index holds 115 prior instances of this class, 2 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. [email protected]

CVE-2021-22900 · Pulse Securematches 4 of 9KEV listed · 2021receipt
CVE-2026-31431 · Linuxmatches 3 of 9KEV listed · 2026receipt

"Matches n of m" counts the attributes the two records can both be compared on: the CVSS metrics they share a version of, any weakness class beyond this one, and the vendor. fit-rules@v1

115 records in this class held. The six above are drawn from the ones CISA has listed as exploited, ranked by how much of the record matches this one. That is why every one of them is KEV-listed: the pool is, so the colour on those spokes says nothing the pool has not already said.

No curated product neighbourhood is held for this product, so the records above are the nearest this index can name. The neighbourhood table covers a small set of products and is extended by hand.

Siblings and hubs

Records related to this one

Browse the index from here

These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2024-29018.

What usually comes next

Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.

Everything on this page is free. Public data. Withholding it protects nothing.