CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
HIGH

CVE-2024-8061

CVE-2024-8061 — Denial of Service in aimhubio/aim

In version 3.23.0 of aimhubio/aim, certain methods that request data from external servers do not have set timeouts, causing the server to wait indefinitely for a response. This can lead to a denial of service, as the tracking server does not respond to other requests while waiting. The issue arises in the client used by the `aim` tracking server to communicate with external resources, specifically in the `_run_read_instructions` method and similar calls without timeouts.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, @huntr_ai

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

aimhubio

aimhubio_aim

CVSS base

7.5

HIGH

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

PoC

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

aimhubio

Products (1)

aimhubio aim

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
7.5CVSS 3.0HIGH——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-1088

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /aim.

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.