Unspecified impact via disputed _transfer calls
Published Oct 30, 2024 · Updated Nov 4, 2024
Incorrect authorization in the PepeGxng contract on Ethereum 1.12.2 allows remote authenticated users unspecified impact via _transfer calls. The public record identifies _transfer as the locus but does not disclose any missing permission check or unsafe state transition; its sole technical reference is no longer available. The claim is disputed because the reported effect is limited to ordinary function calls, so no concrete confidentiality, integrity, or availability consequence is established.
Summary
What happened
Incorrect authorization in the PepeGxng contract on Ethereum 1.12.2 allows remote authenticated users unspecified impact via _transfer calls. The public record identifies _transfer as the locus but does not disclose any missing permission check or unsafe state transition; its sole technical reference is no longer available. The claim is disputed because the reported effect is limited to ordinary function calls, so no concrete confidentiality, integrity, or availability consequence is established.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2024-51426
- Published
- Oct 30, 2024
- Updated
- Nov 4, 2024
- Vendor
- Ethereum Foundation
- Product
- Ethereum
- Classifications
- CWE-863
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- authenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Oct 30, 2024CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Nov 4, 2024Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=1.12.2
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
No public exploit references are available in this record.
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo