CVE-2024-41952
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.
Zitadel has an "Ignoring unknown usernames" vulnerability
rank 19 = 0 + 13 + 0 + 6 + 0
rank@v1 · backlog
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.00633 · without this subject the record ranks 19
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 5.3, from NVD · without this subject the record ranks 6
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 19
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
6 products in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 13
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 19
$7,600 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.24048551839932833 exposure x 0.00633 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
Foresight · where to check next
No weakness class or product neighbourhood is held for this record, so this index cannot name anywhere to check next. That is an absence in the record, not a finding about the software.
Running zitadel? 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.
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 affectedMitigatedChoose 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.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
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
Affected & Fixed Versions as published
Show all 6 published ranges
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.
What it is stated by the CNA
Zitadel is an open source identity management system. ZITADEL administrators can enable a setting called "Ignoring unknown usernames" which helps mitigate attacks that try to guess/enumerate usernames. If enabled, ZITADEL will show the password prompt even if the user doesn't exist and report "Username or Password invalid". Due to a implementation change to prevent deadlocks calling the database, the flag would not be correctly respected in all cases and an attacker would gain information if an account exist within ZITADEL, since the error message shows "object not found" instead of the generic error message. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.58.1, 2.57.1, 2.56.2, 2.55.5, 2.54.8, and 2.53.9. receipt
NVD's analysis a second authority
- severity
- 5.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
- weakness
- CWE-203
- affected versions
- zitadel >= 2.53.0 < 2.53.9; zitadel >= 2.54.0 < 2.54.8; zitadel >= 2.55.0 < 2.55.5; and 3 more, listed in full below
- also scored by
- [email protected] 5.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
check it yourself github.com github.com github.com github.com github.com github.com +7 morereceipt
Movement the material steps
Show all 18 observations
18 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
The record had been public for 1 year, 10 months when this index was last written.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
No record cites this identifier and it carries no alias. Its defect family is below.
Its defect family
zitadel
Of the 2 records in this family, this is the only one whose title names has ignoring unknown.
Grouped by shared product and weakness, not by shared vulnerability. Each record's own state is on its own page.
Family membership: held values
This record is one of a group, and the group's page describes all of them. This page is kept and dated, and the defect family's own page is the one we offer for indexing: the whole group.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2024-41952.
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.