CVE-2024-10291
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA vulnerability has been found in ZZCMS 2023 and classified as critical. This vulnerability affects the function Ebak_DoExecSQL/Ebak_DotranExecutSQL of the file 3/Ebak5.1/upload/phome.php. The manipulation of the argument phome leads to sql injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in ZZCMS 2023's backup/restore module (phome.php). The Ebak_DoExecSQL and Ebak_DotranExecutSQL functions fail to properly sanitize the 'phome' parameter, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to inject arbitrary SQL commands. With CVSS 9.8, this can lead to full database compromise, including data exfiltration and potential system takeover.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 2023CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if ZZCMS is installedLocate the ZZCMS installation directory on the server. Look for the presence of typical ZZCMS file structures such as /zb_system/, /zb_users/, or check for the presence of index.php with ZZCMS branding.Affected if ZZCMS 2023 is installed on the server.
-
Verify the ZZCMS versionCheck the version file or header within the ZZCMS installation. Common locations include a version.php file, footer files, or the admin dashboard version display.Affected if The installed version is exactly 2023 (ZZCMS 2023).
-
Locate the vulnerable phome.php fileSearch for the phome.php file within the ZZCMS installation directory, typically found in the e/class or admin folder paths.Affected if The file phome.php exists in the ZZCMS installation.
-
Inspect the vulnerable functionsOpen phome.php and locate the Ebak_DoExecSQL and Ebak_DotranExecutSQL functions. Examine if they accept and process a 'phome' parameter without sanitization.Affected if The 'phome' parameter is used directly in SQL queries within these functions without proper input validation or parameterization.
A system is affected if it runs ZZCMS version 2023 and contains the phome.php file with vulnerable functions that process the 'phome' parameter in SQL queries.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply parameterized queries/prepared statements for all SQL operations in the affected functions. If immediate patch unavailable, disable or restrict access to the backup module until a fix is deployed. Review other SQL operations in the application for similar issues.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-10291 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-10291 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data