Uncontrolled Search Path (DLL Hijack)Weakness · CWE-427

CVE-2024-13946

MEDIUM · 6.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-05-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated

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 · unedited
DLL's are not digitally signed when loaded in ASPECT's configuration toolset exposing the application to binary planting during device commissioning.This issue affects ASPECT-Enterprise: through 3.*; NEXUS Series: through 3.*; MATRIX Series: through 3.*.

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 confidence

The ASPECT configuration toolset loads DLLs without verifying digital signatures, allowing attackers to perform binary planting attacks during device commissioning. An attacker with access to the commissioning process could place malicious DLLs that the application would load instead of legitimate ones.

MitigationImplement digital code signing for all DLLs in the build process and add signature verification logic before loading any DLL in the configuration toolset.

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
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify ASPECT configuration toolset installation
    Search for the ASPECT configuration toolset application on the system. Check common installation directories (e.g., C:\Program Files\ASPECT, C:\Program Files (x86)\ASPECT) or use system search tools to locate aspect.exe or similar binaries associated with the toolset.
    Affected if The ASPECT configuration toolset is present on the system and is used for device commissioning.
  2. Locate the DLL loading configuration
    Examine the application configuration files (e.g., .config XML files, INI files) or registry entries associated with the ASPECT toolset. Look for settings that control DLL loading behavior, such as assembly bindings or module loading paths.
    Affected if No digital signature verification is enforced or configured for DLL loading within the toolset.
  3. Inspect DLL search paths
    Review the toolset's directory structure to identify folders from which DLLs are loaded. Check for world-writable directories where an attacker could place malicious DLLs (e.g., the application directory, working directory, or commissioning data folders).
    Affected if The toolset loads DLLs from directories accessible to attackers or uses relative paths without verification.
  4. Check for signature verification in loading logic
    If access to the toolset's executable or helper libraries is available, inspect the code or binary for digital signature verification calls (e.g., WinVerifyTrust, SignerFree, CryptQueryObject) before LoadLibrary or similar DLL loading functions.
    Affected if The code contains no signature verification logic before loading DLLs.
  5. Review commissioning workflow
    Examine the device commissioning process documentation or workflow. Identify if the process involves copying or loading external DLL files onto the device or configuration workstation, and verify whether those files are validated before use.
    Affected if The commissioning process loads external DLLs without requiring or verifying digital signatures.

The user is affected if the ASPECT configuration toolset is installed and loads DLLs without verifying digital signatures, particularly during the device commissioning workflow.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement digital code signing for all DLLs in the build process and add signature verification logic before loading any DLL in the configuration toolset.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-13946 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-13946 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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