CVE-2024-11933
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 · uneditedFuji Electric Monitouch V-SFT X1 File Parsing Heap-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Fuji Electric Monitouch V-SFT. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the parsing of X1 files. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a heap-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-24548.
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 confidenceA heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in Fuji Electric Monitouch V-SFT's X1 file parsing functionality. The flaw stems from insufficient validation of user-supplied data length before copying into a heap-allocated buffer, allowing attackers to achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the current process.
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= 6.2.3.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Verify Monitouch V-SFT installationCheck system for presence of Fuji Electric Monitouch V-SFT software - typically found in Program Files or vendor-specific directories. Look for executable files related to Monitouch V-SFT or its X1 file handling functionality.Affected if The software is installed and version 6.2.3.0 is confirmed
-
Confirm installed version numberRight-click the application executable, select Properties, and check the File Version field, or use the software's built-in About/Help menu to display version information.Affected if The displayed version is exactly 6.2.3.0
-
Identify X1 file usageSearch the system for .x1 file extensions in user-accessible directories, particularly in project folders, recent documents, or the software's working directory.Affected if Any .x1 files exist on the system that may have been opened with this software
-
Assess source of X1 filesReview the origin of any .x1 files - check file properties, metadata, or network provenance to determine if files came from untrusted or external sources.Affected if X1 files originate from untrusted, external, or unknown sources
A system is affected if Monitouch V-SFT version 6.2.3.0 is installed and has been used to open X1 files, particularly from untrusted sources.
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 dataUsers should avoid opening untrusted X1 files and await the vendor patch. Organizations using this software should inventory affected systems and implement additional network segmentation as a defense-in-depth measure until the official update is available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,872.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-11933 — 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-2024-11933 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