Rejetto HTTP File Server 2.3m Unauthenticated RCE (CVE-2024-23692)
Published Last modified In CISA KEV since Sources: pwn.watch, CVE.org
What is affected, what to do
Rejetto HTTP File Server, up to and including version 2.3m, is vulnerable to a template injection vulnerability. This vulnerability allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the affected system by sending a specially crafted HTTP request.
The vulnerability is being actively exploited; treat it as a priority. CISA lists it as used in ransomware campaigns. The available sources name no fixed version. Check the vendor guidance in the references below. Immediate actions, mitigation and detection rules are in the runbook below.
- Affected
- Rejetto HTTP File Server
lte *..2.3m
- Rejetto HTTP File Server
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
9.8
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: NVD, CVSS v3
9.8
CVSS v3
Severity Critical on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: pwn.watch, CVE.org
99.49 %
EPSS score
High — model estimates ≥ 50% chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 99.94
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Critical
Priority (0–325)
The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?
Read in glossary- 259.26 Methodology
Exploit maturity
An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.
Read in glossary- actively exploited
XIEM Effective CVSS
XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.
Read in glossary- 9.8 Methodology
CVSS v3
CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.
Read in glossary- 9.8
EPSS score
The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.
Read in glossary- 99.49 %
- High — model estimates ≥ 50% chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days.
EPSS percentile
The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.
Read in glossary- 99.94
- Critical — this CVE ranks in the top fifth of all CVEs scored today (rank ≥ 80%).
KEV status
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossary- Actively exploited
- Published
In CISA KEV since
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossaryCWE
CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.
Read in glossary- CWE-1336
Response and mitigation
Why act now?
Prioritisation rationale
This is one of the most heavily exploited entries on the KEV list: unauthenticated remote code execution via a single HTTP request, trivially automatable, with public PoCs circulating since June 2024 and mass scanning ongoing. The CISA ransomware flag combined with a very high exploitation likelihood justifies treating any discovered HFS 2.x host as a P1 incident — pay particular attention to labs, departmental file shares, and shadow IT, where HFS traditionally shows up. Because the 2.x branch is end-of-life, decommissioning or migrating to HFS 3.x is the only durable fix; everything else is a bridging control.
Runbook step 1
Immediate response (0-24 h)
- Take every Rejetto HFS 2.3m instance (and any older 2.x build) offline immediately — the 2.x branch is end-of-life, no vendor patch will be issued.
- Plan and test migration to the actively maintained HFS 3.x line (github.com/rejetto/hfs); until the cutover, move affected hosts into an isolated VLAN with no inbound internet exposure.
- Perimeter firewall change: block inbound TCP 80/8080 (or whichever port the HFS listener is bound to) from the internet to affected hosts; apply tight egress filtering outbound from these hosts to kill reverse shells.
- Rotate credentials on every host running HFS: local admin passwords, service accounts, cached browser credentials, SSH keys. Unauthenticated RCE as SYSTEM/Administrator must be treated as full host compromise.
- Triage the HFS hosts now: inspect the hfs.exe process tree (child processes such as cmd.exe, powershell.exe, mshta.exe, certutil.exe, curl.exe are strong IoCs); if hits are found, image the host for forensics before rebuild.
Runbook step 2
Mitigation layers
- Network segmentation: HFS must not be reachable from the DMZ or internet. Where business-critical, front it with an nginx or HAProxy reverse proxy enforcing a URL allowlist and dropping requests that contain template metacharacters ({., }}, %7b, %7d) in the request line or query string.
- WAF/IPS rules: drop HTTP requests containing
{.exec|,{.?exec,{.add|,{.set|or their URL-encoded forms (%7B.exec%7C) in URI or body. Suricata/Snort signatures for CVE-2024-23692 ship in ET Open; run them in blocking mode, not just alert. - Endpoint hardening: run the HFS process under a dedicated unprivileged local account (not SYSTEM, not Administrator). Add an AppLocker/WDAC rule that prevents hfs.exe from spawning interpreters (cmd, powershell, wscript, cscript, bitsadmin).
- File-system layer: set upload directories read-only where possible; otherwise strip execute permissions via NTFS ACLs and enable AV on-access scanning on the upload path.
- IAM: expose the HFS admin interface only over VPN with MFA; disable default credentials and anonymous access in HFS configuration even though the exploit itself needs no auth — this limits post-exploitation lateral movement.
Runbook step 3
Detection rules
- Sysmon Event ID 1 (Process Creation) with ParentImage ending in
\hfs.exeand ChildImage in (cmd.exe, powershell.exe, mshta.exe, rundll32.exe, certutil.exe, bitsadmin.exe, curl.exe, wget.exe) — treat as alert, not just log. - Web / reverse-proxy access logs: search for
GET /?search=%7B.exec,{.exec|,{.?add,{.set|, and long base64-looking query strings immediately afterexec|. KQL shape:W3CIISLog | where csUriQuery has_any ("{.exec", "%7B.exec", "{.?add", "{.set|"). - Network telemetry (Zeek http.log, Suricata): correlate URIs containing template delimiters with user agents such as
curl/,python-requests/, empty UA, or known scanner fingerprints (Nuclei, zgrab). - EDR process chains: HFS → PowerShell with
-nop,-w hidden,-encflags, or HFS → any process initiating outbound connections to 4444/1337/9999 (default reverse-shell ports in the public PoCs). - Windows Security Event ID 4688 / 4624: unexpected logons shortly after HFS activity, plus new local accounts. On Linux auditd:
execvewith comm=hfs referencing /bin/sh in argv.
- Sysmon Event ID 1 (Process Creation) with ParentImage ending in
Detection rules
No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.
Classification under NIS2 and CRA
Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.
NIS2
NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.
Read in glossary- Actively exploited: treat the vulnerability as a priority in vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2. If it is exploited in your environment, check the reporting obligation under Art. 23 (early warning within 24 hours).
CRA
The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.
Read in glossary- Since 11.09.2026, manufacturers of affected products with digital elements must report actively exploited vulnerabilities under Art. 14 CRA, with an early warning within 24 hours via ENISA's single reporting platform.
ISO/IEC 27001
ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.
Read in glossary- Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.
Description
Rejetto HTTP File Server, up to and including version 2.3m, is vulnerable to a template injection vulnerability. This vulnerability allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the affected system by sending a specially crafted HTTP request. As of the CVE assignment date, Rejetto HFS 2.3m is no longer supported.
Source: pwn.watch, CISA KEV Catalog, cvelistv5, NVD (NIST), CVE.org (MITRE)
Affected products
The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rejetto | HTTP File Server |
|
|
| rejetto | http_file_server |
|
|
Vendors and products
Weakness classes (CWE)
CWE-1336Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine
Base
The product uses a template engine to insert or process externally-influenced input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements or syntax that can be interpreted as template expressions or other code directives when processed by the engine.
Entry at MITRE CWE-1336
Public exploit references
Publicly reported proof-of-concepts, exploit modules and detection templates for this vulnerability. NEOSEC links to the original sources only and does not provide any exploit code.
| CISA KEV Catalog | CISA Known Exploited Vulnerability (opens in a new tab)cisa.gov | actively exploited | |
| Metasploit Framework (Pull Request) | Metasploit PR #19240 (opens in a new tab)github.com | PoC (publicly reported)reported, not verified | — |
References & sources
- vulncheck.comadvisories/rejetto-unauth-rceThird-party advisory
- mohemiv.comall/rejetto-http-file-server-2-3m-unauthenticated-rceThird-party advisory, Technical description
- github.comrapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/19240Issue tracking
- cisa.govknown-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2024-23692government-resource
- vicarius.iovsociety/posts/unauthenticated-rce-flaw-in-rejetto-http-file-se…
- vicarius.iovsociety/posts/cve-2024-23692-detect-rejetto-hfs-vulnerability
- vicarius.iovsociety/posts/cve-2024-23692-rejetto-hfs-mitigate-vulnerability
- pwn.watchpwn.watch: Rejetto HTTP File Server Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Enginepwn-watch
- github.comRejetto advisory: CVE-2024-23692pwn-watch
- rejetto.comRejetto advisory: CVE-2024-23692pwn-watch
- NVD (NIST)NVD: CVE-2024-23692pwn-watch
- cisa.govCISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalogpwn-watch
Reanalysis & status changes
Chronological NVD audit events for this CVE — reanalyses, CVSS updates, CPE diffs.
CVE Modified134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
- SSVC:
before {"id":"CVE-2024-23692","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"active"},{"automatable":"yes"},{"technic…after {"id":"CVE-2024-23692","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"active"},{"automatable":"yes"},{"technic…
- SSVC:
Embed badge
Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.
<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2024-23692"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2024-23692.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2024-23692 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>