Applications and libraries which misuse connection.serverAuthenticate (via callback field ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback) may be susceptible to an authorization bypass. The documentation for ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback says that "A call to this function does not guarantee that the key offered is in fact used to authenticate." Specifically, the SSH protocol allows clients to inquire about whether a public key is acceptable before proving control of the corresponding private key. PublicKeyCallback may be called with multiple keys, and the order in which the keys were provided cannot be used to infer which key the client successfully authenticated with, if any. Some applications, which store the key(s) passed to PublicKeyCallback (or derived information) and make security relevant determinations based on it once the connection is established, may make incorrect assumptions. For example, an attacker may send public keys A and B, and then authenticate with A. PublicKeyCallback would be called only twice, first with A and then with B. A vulnerable application may then make authorization decisions based on key B for which the attacker does not actually control the private key. Since this API is widely misused, as a partial mitigation golang.org/x/cry...@v0.31.0 enforces the property that, when successfully authenticating via public key, the last key passed to ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback will be the key used to authenticate the connection. PublicKeyCallback will now be called multiple times with the same key, if necessary. Note that the client may still not control the last key passed to PublicKeyCallback if the connection is then authenticated with a different method, such as PasswordCallback, KeyboardInteractiveCallback, or NoClientAuth. Users should be using the Extensions field of the Permissions return value from the various authentication callbacks to record data associated with the authentication attempt instead of referencing external state. Once the connection is established the state corresponding to the successful authentication attempt can be retrieved via the ServerConn.Permissions field. Note that some third-party libraries misuse the Permissions type by sharing it across authentication attempts; users of third-party libraries should refer to the relevant projects for guidance.
CVE-2024-45337
“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.
Score 9.1 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2024-12-11. NVD baseline CVSS 9.1; sources differ by 0.0.
Also known asEUVD-2024-3508 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-v778-237x-gjrc (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD
- Public exploit or proof-of-concept code is available
A fix is available — apply it.
- CVSS v3
- 9.1
- EG Score
- 9.1CRITICALmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 72EG Risk 72/100
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.
How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity91% × 45%Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.Exploitation40% × 40%EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.Automatability100% × 15%CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high. - EPSS PROB
- 3.2%
- EPSS %ILE
- 88th
- KEV
- Not listed
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 9.1 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 3.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
Published
December 12, 2024
Last Modified
April 15, 2026
Advisory Details (7)
Auto-updated Aug 1, 2026oss-security - Vulnerability in golang.org/x/crypto [CVE-2024-45337: misuse of ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback may cause authorization bypass]
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/12/11/2x/crypto/ssh: misuse of ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback may cause authorization bypass · Issue #70779 · golang/go · GitHub
https://go.dev/issue/70779commit b4f1988a35de (golang/crypto)
Fix landed in golang/crypto commit b4f1988a35de — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/golang/crypto/commit/b4f1988a35dee11ec3e05d6bf3e90b695fbd8909Vendor Advisories for CVE-2024-45337(20)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
- RHSA-2026:6568Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Quay 3.15.4
- RHSA-2026:2762Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Quay 3.10.18
- RHSA-2026:2754Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Quay 3.9.18
- RHSA-2026:2681Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Quay 3.16.2
- RHSA-2026:1730Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Quay 3.12.13
- RHSA-2025:23207Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat OpenShift GitOps v1.16.5 security update
- RHSA-2025:23206Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat OpenShift GitOps v1.17.3 security update
- RHSA-2025:23203Red Hat Product SecurityHigh
Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat OpenShift GitOps v1.18.2 security update
- +12 more
Patch Availability(31)
Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.
Affected Packages
(5 across 5 ecosystems)
Debian:11(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| golang-go.crypto | 1:0.0~git20201221.eec23a3-1 ... 1:0.53.0-1 (40 versions) |
| — |
Debian:12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| golang-go.crypto | 1:0.10.0-1 ... 1:0.56.0-1 (36 versions) |
| — |
Debian:13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| golang-go.crypto | 1:0.25.0-1 ... 1:0.56.0-1 (21 versions) |
| — |
Debian:14(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| golang-go.crypto | 1:0.25.0-1, 1:0.33.0-1~exp1, 1:0.36.0-1~exp1, 1:0.41.0-1~exp1, 1:0.42.0-1~exp1 |
| — |
Go(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| golang.org/x/crypto | — |
| — |
Weakness Classification(1)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Additional Vendor Advisories
(24)
Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.
- Microsoft MSRCCVE-2024-453372024-12-20
Misuse of connection.serverAuthenticate may cause authorization bypass in golang.org/x/crypto
- Red HatRHBA-2025:0250IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHBA-2025:0250 — Important
- Red HatRHBA-2025:0301IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHBA-2025:0301 — Important
- Red HatRHBA-2025:1076IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHBA-2025:1076 — Important
- Red HatRHBA-2025:1077IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHBA-2025:1077 — Important
- Red HatRHBA-2025:1597IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHBA-2025:1597 — Important
- Red HatRHEA-2025:10586IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHEA-2025:10586 — Important
- Red HatRHEA-2025:12284IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHEA-2025:12284 — Important
- Red HatRHEA-2025:13172IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHEA-2025:13172 — Important
- Red HatRHEA-2025:3152IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHEA-2025:3152 — Important
- Red HatRHEA-2025:4438IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHEA-2025:4438 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2024:11037IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2024:11037 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2024:11038IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2024:11038 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2024:6121IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2024:6121 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0370IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0370 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0385IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0385 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0386IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0386 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0390IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0390 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0444IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0444 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0445IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0445 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0485IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0485 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0522IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0522 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0535IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0535 — Important
- Red HatRHSA-2025:0536IMPORTANT2024-12-11
RHSA-2025:0536 — Important
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 23× in last 7d / 74× in last 30d)
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.
Showing the most recent 98 of 255 refreshes on record for this CVE.
A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 2 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 157 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.
- 2026-11-02 03:59 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-02 03:59 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-11-02 03:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-v778-237x-gjrc · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
- 2026-11-01 08:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-v778-237x-gjrc · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
- 2026-11-01 08:12 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-01 02:19 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-01 02:19 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-31 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-31 00:38 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-31 00:38 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-30 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-29 22:58 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-29 22:58 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-29 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-28 21:18 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-28 21:18 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-28 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 88th percentile
- 2026-10-27 19:36 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-27 19:36 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-27 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-26 17:56 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-26 17:56 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-26 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-25 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-25 15:43 UTCEG score recompute
Show 73 moreShow fewer
- 2026-10-25 15:42 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-24 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-24 13:57 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-24 13:57 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-23 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-23 12:17 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-23 12:17 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-22 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-22 10:35 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-22 10:35 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-21 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-21 08:53 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-21 08:53 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-20 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-20 07:12 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-20 07:12 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-19 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-19 05:30 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-19 05:30 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-18 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-18 03:49 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-18 03:49 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-17 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-17 02:09 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-17 02:09 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-16 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-16 00:28 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-16 00:28 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-15 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-14 19:01 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-14 19:01 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-14 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-13 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-13 15:23 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-12 17:45 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-12 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-12 13:40 UTCVendor advisory
- 2026-10-11 21:10 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 16:02 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-10 19:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-09 20:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-08 17:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-07 23:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-07 04:54 UTCOSV refresh
- 2026-10-06 15:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-05 17:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-04 23:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-03 14:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-10-01 19:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-30 19:53 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-30 15:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-29 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-28 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-27 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-26 15:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-24 14:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-23 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-22 14:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-21 20:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-19 15:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-18 19:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-17 10:36 UTCOSV refresh
- 2026-09-16 14:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-16 05:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-15 03:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-13 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-12 14:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-11 14:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-11 09:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-08 21:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-07 16:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
- 2026-09-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 3.2% · 87th percentile
Publicly available exploits
(1 reference)Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (1 GitHub PoC). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.
- GitHub PoCNHAS/CVE-2024-45337-POCPublished Dec 17, 2024
Proof of concept (POC) for CVE-2024-45337
Open source ↗
Related CVEs(same product + same vendor + same CWE)
Same product
10 shownDebian:11:golang-go.crypto
Same vendor
10 shownredhat:RHSA-2024:11037 · redhat:RHBA-2025:0301 · redhat:RHEA-2025:3152
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2024-45337?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2024-45337 published?
Is CVE-2024-45337 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-45337?
How do I remediate CVE-2024-45337?
Dependency Blast Radius
See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2024-45337
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2024-45337?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.