CVE-2024-12646
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 · uneditedThe topm-client from Chunghwa Telecom has an Arbitrary File Delete vulnerability. The application sets up a simple local web server and provides APIs for communication with the target website. Due to the lack of CSRF protection in the APIs, unauthenticated remote attackers could use these APIs through phishing. Additionally, one of the APIs contains an Absolute Path Traversal vulnerability, allowing attackers to delete arbitrary files on the user's system.
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 confidenceThe topm-client application runs a local web server providing APIs for communication with target websites. These APIs lack CSRF protection, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to exploit them through phishing attacks. One specific API contains an Absolute Path Traversal vulnerability that enables attackers to delete arbitrary files on the victim's system by specifying full file paths.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Confirm topm-client is installedLook for the topm-client application in common installation directories (e.g., Program Files on Windows, /Applications or /usr/local on macOS, /opt or ~/ on Linux). Check running processes for topm-client executable.Affected if topm-client is installed and running on the system
-
Identify topm-client versionRun the application with version flag (e.g., topm-client --version, or check About/Properties in GUI). Compare the installed version against any known affected version ranges provided by the vendor.Affected if installed version falls within an affected version range (if such ranges are defined)
-
Verify local web server is activeCheck if the topm-client local web server is listening on its configured port (commonly localhost ports in the 8000-9000 range). Use commands like 'netstat -an | grep LISTEN' or 'ss -tuln' to identify ports bound by topm-client.Affected if the local web server is running and accepting connections (even from localhost)
-
Test API accessibilityAttempt to access the API endpoint suspected of containing the path traversal vulnerability. Send a request to the local web server (e.g., http://localhost:<port>/api/<endpoint>) using curl or similar tool.Affected if the API endpoint is reachable and responds to requests (indicating the vulnerable feature is enabled)
The environment is affected if topm-client is installed with a vulnerable version, the local web server is active, and the API endpoint containing the path traversal flaw is accessible and not protected by authentication.
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 dataImplement CSRF protection (e.g., anti-CSRF tokens) on all APIs and add proper input validation to sanitize file paths, restricting deletion to allowed directories only. Consider implementing authentication for the local API endpoints.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-12646 — 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-2024-12646 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