dbcve.org
Missing AuthenticationWeakness · CWE-306

CVE-2024-23815

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-05-13
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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
A vulnerability has been identified in Desigo CC (All versions if access from Installed Clients to Desigo CC server is allowed from networks outside of a highly protected zone), Desigo CC (All versions if access from Installed Clients to Desigo CC server is only allowed within highly protected zones). The affected server application fails to authenticate specific client requests. Modification of the client binary could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to execute arbitrary SQL queries on the server database via the event port (default: 4998/tcp)

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

Desigo CC server fails to authenticate specific client requests on the event port (default: 4998/tcp). An unauthenticated remote attacker can modify the client binary to send crafted requests that bypass authentication, enabling arbitrary SQL query execution on the server database.

MitigationRestrict network access to the Desigo CC server's event port (4998/tcp) to only trusted clients within the highly protected zone; implement integrity verification for client binaries to prevent tampering.

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
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

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 if Desigo CC server is installed
    Look for Desigo CC installation directories (typically under C:\Program Files\Siemens\Desigo CC or /opt/siemens/desigo_cc) and check for running processes named 'DesigoCC' or 'Desigo' in task manager or via 'tasklist | findstr Desigo' on Windows or 'ps aux | grep -i desigo' on Linux
    Affected if Desigo CC software is present on the system and running as a service
  2. Check if event port 4998/tcp is listening
    Run 'netstat -an | findstr 4998' on Windows or 'netstat -tlnp | grep 4998' on Linux to see if port 4998 is in LISTEN state
    Affected if Port 4998/tcp is open and listening for connections
  3. Verify network exposure of the event port
    Use nmap or PowerShell to test remote connectivity to port 4998: 'Test-NetConnection -ComputerName <server_ip> -Port 4998' or scan from an external system to confirm the port is reachable beyond localhost
    Affected if Port 4998/tcp is accessible from untrusted network segments or the internet
  4. Check installed Desigo CC version
    Inspect Desigo CC version through the application (Help > About), registry keys under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Siemens\Desigo CC, or installation logs in the program directory
    Affected if The installed version falls within any vulnerable release range (compare your version against official Siemens security advisories for CVE-2024-23815)
  5. Inspect firewall and network segmentation rules
    Review Windows Firewall rules or network ACLs: 'netsh advfirewall firewall show rule name=all' on Windows, or iptables/suricata rules on Linux, to see if port 4998 is restricted to specific trusted IP addresses
    Affected if Port 4998/tcp allows unrestricted access from any IP address rather than being limited to trusted client subnets

You are affected if Desigo CC is running with port 4998/tcp exposed to untrusted networks and your installed version is identified as vulnerable in Siemens security advisories for CVE-2024-23815.

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

Restrict network access to the Desigo CC server's event port (4998/tcp) to only trusted clients within the highly protected zone; implement integrity verification for client binaries to prevent tampering.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
27.0 hours of engineering $4,800
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,680.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-23815 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2024-23815 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