How severe is CVE-2024-31215?

CVE-2024-31215 has a CVSS score of 6.3/10, rated MEDIUM. Review your exposure and patch according to your risk tolerance.

Which packages are affected by CVE-2024-31215?

CVE-2024-31215 affects the following packages: mobsf (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix CVE-2024-31215?

Update mobsf to 3.9.8 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2024-31215 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect CVE-2024-31215 in my PyPI dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for mobsf, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate CVE-2024-31215 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

Restrict outbound requests from the affected component to an allowlist of hosts, block access to link-local and internal address ranges at the network layer, and require authentication on internal services so a forged request cannot reach them unauthenticated.

Is CVE-2024-31215 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for CVE-2024-31215 yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for CVE-2024-31215?

CVE-2024-31215 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.5%, placing it in the 44th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is CVE-2024-31215?

CVE-2024-31215 is classified as Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (CWE-918). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation. This is a high-impact weakness class that often enables remote code execution or data exposure.

When was CVE-2024-31215 published, and has it been updated?

CVE-2024-31215 was published on April 4, 2024 and was last updated on October 28, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐍

🐍 PyPI

Not in CISA KEV

MEDIUM severity

CVE-2024-31215 — mobsf

MEDIUMFix: MobSF/Mobile-Security-Framework-MobSF@43bb71d

CVE-2024-31215 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.3) Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in mobsf. A fix is available for mobsf — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Mobile Security Framework (MobSF) vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in firebase database check

Also known asGHSA-wpff-wm84-x5cxPYSEC-2026-1676

Published

Apr 4, 2024

Updated

Oct 28, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Nov 5, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2024-31215.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs44th percentile — riskier than 44% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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

1 pkg affected

🐍mobsf

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? SSRF vulnerability in firebase database check logic. The attacker can cause the server to make a connection to internal-only services within the organization’s infrastructure. When malicious app is uploaded to Static analyzer, it is possible to make internal requests.

Credits: Oleg Surnin (Positive Technologies).

Patches

Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to? v3.9.8 and above

Workarounds

Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading? Code level patch

References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more? https://github.com/MobSF/Mobile-Security-Framework-MobSF/pull/2373

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`mobsf`	all versions	3.9.8`pip install --upgrade 'mobsf==3.9.8'`

Affected Products

1 product · 1 configurations

Application

mobile security frameworkopensecurity

< 3.9.8

range

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for mobsf, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update mobsf to 3.9.8 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2024-31215 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Restrict outbound requests from the affected component to an allowlist of hosts, block access to link-local and internal address ranges at the network layer, and require authentication on internal services so a forged request cannot reach them unauthenticated.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact _What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_ SSRF vulnerability in firebase database check logic. The attacker can cause the server to make a connection to internal-only services within the organization’s infrastructure. When malicious app is uploaded to Static analyzer, it is possible to make internal requests. Credits: Oleg Surnin (Positive Technologies). ### Patches _Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?_ v3.9.8 and above ### Workarounds _Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?_ Code level patch