basicsecurity.net
Proof, not just disclosure.
Threats / Oracle / CVE-2024-20953
CVE-2024-20953 · EUVD no mirror located · GCVE no mirror located Verified 2026-06-22

Oracle Agile Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) vulnerability

Oracle Agile PLM contains a deserialization vulnerability (CWE-502) allowing low-privileged network attackers to compromise the system via HTTP.

Verdict

Today item — known-exploited.

A deserialization flaw in Oracle Agile PLM enables unauthenticated or low-privileged attackers to execute arbitrary code through malicious serialized objects, leading to system compromise. Active exploitation has been observed.

CISA KEV Yes · 2025-02-243EPSS 0.03405 (verify live)4
01

Is it exploitable?

— the evidence, ranked above the score
Reported exploitation
4 independent public reports of in-the-wild exploitation are cataloged.Distinct reporting sources (vendor, incident response, government); open them for the underlying claims.
Exploited in the wild
Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2025-02-24).
CISA KEV ↗Confirmed
Probability (EPSS)
EPSS 0.03405 — modeled likelihood of exploitation activity.EPSS is a daily-changing model output — open the source for today's value.
Severity / affected
Affected: Oracle, Agile Product Lifecycle Management (PLM). Confirm exact fixed builds in the vendor advisory.
NVD ↗Reported
Weakness (CWE)
Mapped to CWE-502 Deserialization of Untrusted Data — weakness family: Injection.CWE assignment from the public NVD record; the weakness class drives how the flaw is exploited.
NVD ↗Reported
02

Who’s exploiting it?

— attribution turns risk into urgency
Attribution not established

No confirmed (advisory-backed) threat-actor attribution is established for this record. Absence of a named actor is not absence of compromise — see Coverage & confidence.

03

Why it matters

— the attack path, told twice: adversary, then board
1

Front door — unauthenticated access narrative 1

Attacker
I craft a malicious serialized Java object and send it to the vulnerable HTTP endpoint.
Business
An attacker gains initial code execution within the PLM application server process.
2

Keys to the kingdom — privilege/identity takeover narrative 2

Attacker
I leverage the deserialization gadget chain to execute arbitrary commands on the host system.
Business
The attacker escalates from application compromise to operating system-level control.
3

Lateral reach — past segmentation narrative 3

Attacker
I access sensitive product design data, intellectual property, and manufacturing specifications stored in the PLM database.
Business
Confidential product roadmaps, designs, and trade secrets are exfiltrated, causing competitive harm and potential regulatory exposure.
04

What to do

— defensible action
  • Remediate per the vendor advisory — confirm the fixed build for your version and verify exposure.1
Say it to the boardA vulnerability with this evidence profile is a defensible budget line, not a backlog ticket — fund the change against the proof above.
05

Coverage & confidence

— what we know, and what we don’t

Established (cited)

  • KEV listing (CISA)
  • EPSS probability (FIRST)
  • 4 reported-exploitation source(s)
  • CWE weakness mapping (NVD)
  • Catalogued by oracle (CNA)
  • Coverage gaps — stated, not hidden

  • No EUVD / GCVE mirror in feed — single-authority dependency for the identifier.
  • EPSS & exposure are time-varying; verify live at the source.
  • Threat-actor attribution not established from feed data — absence of a name is not absence of compromise.
  • No finder/reporter credit recorded in the public CVE entry — the work behind this find is unattributed.
  • Disclosure & credit2
    Catalogued by oracleCNA
    Credited with finding itNo finder named in the public CVE record — the work behind this find is unattributed.