Beego has Collision Hazards of MD5 in Cache Key Filenames

Exploitation

No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.

CVSS 4.0

6.9 · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N · score source

EPSS

• CVE-2024-55885: 0.35% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 28.34 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

In the context of using MD5 to generate filenames for cache keys, there are significant collision hazards that need to be considered. MD5, or Message Digest Algorithm 5, is a widely known cryptographic hash function that produces a 128-bit hash value. However, MD5 is no longer considered secure against well-funded opponents due to its vulnerability to collision attacks. Understanding Collisions A collision in hashing occurs when two different inputs produce the same hash output. For MD5, this means that it is theoretically possible, and even practical, to find two distinct cache keys that result in the same MD5 hash. This vulnerability has been well-documented and exploited in various security contexts. Implications for Cache Systems In a cache system where filenames are derived from the MD5 hash of cache keys, a collision could lead to several critical issues: Data Integrity Risks: If two different keys collide, they will map to the same filename. This could result in data being…

Published by the source

12 Dec 2024, 19:22 UTC

Last modified by the source

18 Dec 2024, 19:22 UTC

Source last checked

26 Oct 2026, 15:08 UTC

1. Revision 1 · created · 26 Oct 2026

   Published from ghsa record GHSA-9j3m-fr7q-jxfw

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2024-55885

Advisory: Beego has Collision Hazards of MD5 in Cache Key Filenames
IDs: CVE-2024-55885, GHSA-9j3m-fr7q-jxfw
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2024-55885 (revision 1, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 15:08 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: Medium (CVSS 6.9)
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Partial vendor fix; fixed versions by package: github.com/beego/beego/v2 2.3.4. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- Go github.com/beego/beego: affected <= 1.12.14
- Go github.com/beego/beego/v2: affected < 2.3.4; fixed in 2.3.4

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- Go github.com/beego/beego: check the installed version with your package manager.
- Go github.com/beego/beego/v2: check the installed version with your package manager.

## Supported action
No complete vendor fix is recorded. Follow the primary source's mitigation guidance and check this record again before closing anything.

## Required regression checks
- Run the test suite and a production build.
- Exercise the features that depend on github.com/beego/beego, github.com/beego/beego/v2.
- Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed.

## Rollback considerations
- Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward.

## Unresolved questions
- Which deployments run an affected version?
- Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority.
- Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production.

## Sources
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-9j3m-fr7q-jxfw (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-9j3m-fr7q-jxfw lists affected ranges: Go github.com/beego/beego/v2 >=0 =0 <=1.12.14)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.