CVE-2024-1889
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in SMA Cluster Controller, affecting version 01.05.01.R. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to send a malicious link to an authenticated user to perform actions with these user permissions on the affected device.
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 · moderate confidenceCross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in SMA Cluster Controller version 01.05.01.R allows authenticated users to be tricked into unknowingly executing unauthorized commands via malicious links. The attacker leverages the trusted session of a logged-in user to perform actions with that user's privileges on the affected device.
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= 01.05.01.r= 01.05.01.rCVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Identify the SMA Cluster Controller modelLocate the device label or check the web interface header to determine if it is Sma Clcon 10 or Sma Clcon S 10Affected if The model is Sma Clcon 10 or Sma Clcon S 10
-
Verify the firmware versionAccess the web management interface and navigate to the firmware/version information section, or check the device status page for the installed firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is exactly 01.05.01.r
-
Confirm web interface accessibilityDetermine if the web management interface is reachable from network browsers and check if authentication sessions are activeAffected if The web interface is accessible and users can maintain authenticated sessions
-
Assess network exposureCheck if the device management interface is exposed to untrusted networks or can be accessed via links from untrusted sourcesAffected if The device can be accessed by attackers who could trick authenticated users into clicking malicious links
The user is affected if they have a Sma Clcon 10 or Sma Clcon S 10 device running firmware version exactly 01.05.01.r with the web interface accessible to potential attackers.
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 anti-CSRF tokens for state-changing operations and validate Origin/Referer headers to ensure requests originate from legitimate sources.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-1889 — 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-2024-1889 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