CVE-2024-29151 in Rocket.Chat.Audit
Summary
by MITRE • 03/18/2024
Rocket.Chat.Audit through 5ad78e8 depends on filecachetools, which does not exist in PyPI.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 08/13/2024
The vulnerability in Rocket.Chat.Audit version 5ad78e8 stems from its dependency on a non-existent package named filecachetools within the Python Package Index. This represents a critical supply chain security issue where the application references a library that has never been published to PyPI, creating a fundamental dependency failure that prevents proper installation and operation of the auditing functionality.
This flaw demonstrates poor dependency management practices and highlights the risks associated with referencing external packages that may not be available in public repositories. The absence of filecachetools in PyPI indicates either an incorrect package name, a typo in the dependency specification, or an attempt to use a private/internal library that has not been properly published for public consumption.
From a technical perspective, this vulnerability creates a complete failure condition where Rocket.Chat.Audit cannot function as intended because it cannot resolve its required dependencies. The application will fail during installation or runtime when attempting to import or utilize the missing filecachetools package, potentially leading to denial of service conditions for audit capabilities and security monitoring functions.
The operational impact extends beyond simple functionality loss as this dependency issue could mask underlying security concerns or prevent organizations from properly implementing audit trails that are essential for compliance requirements. Security teams relying on Rocket.Chat.Audit for monitoring and logging activities would face complete disruption of their audit processes, potentially leaving systems vulnerable to undetected security incidents.
This vulnerability aligns with CWE-1074 which addresses dependencies on external packages that do not exist or are unavailable in public repositories, and represents a classic supply chain attack vector where attackers might attempt to exploit the dependency resolution process by introducing malicious alternatives. Organizations should implement strict dependency validation processes and maintain comprehensive inventories of all software components to prevent such issues.
Mitigation strategies should include verifying all package dependencies against official repositories before deployment, implementing dependency lock files to ensure consistent package versions, and establishing automated scanning processes that can detect missing or invalid dependencies during the build process. The ATT&CK framework categorizes this as a supply chain compromise technique where adversaries manipulate software dependencies to gain access to target systems.
Organizations should immediately audit their Rocket.Chat.Audit installations for similar dependency issues and implement security controls around package management processes. Regular security assessments of third-party components and continuous monitoring of dependency health can prevent similar vulnerabilities from affecting operational security posture. The vulnerability underscores the importance of maintaining proper software supply chain hygiene and implementing robust dependency verification mechanisms to protect against both accidental misconfigurations and intentional attacks targeting software dependencies.
This issue demonstrates how seemingly minor dependency configuration errors can create significant security gaps in enterprise environments where audit and monitoring capabilities are critical for compliance and threat detection operations. Proper package management practices, including validation against official repositories and implementation of secure dependency resolution processes, are essential to prevent such failures from compromising security infrastructure.