CVE-2024-25552
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 · uneditedA local attacker can gain administrative privileges by inserting an executable file in the path of the affected product.
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 confidenceThe vulnerability allows a local attacker to achieve privilege escalation by placing a malicious executable in a location where the affected product will inadvertently execute it. This indicates insecure path resolution where the application uses relative paths or does not properly validate the full path to executables it calls, allowing PATH manipulation or binary planting.
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<= 3.93<= 4.42<= 4.88CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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 installed Wut product and versionCheck Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall for entries containing 'Wut Com Port Redirector' or 'Wut Opc Server', or check the application's About/Help dialog for the version numberAffected if The installed version is at or below 3.93 for Legacy, 4.42 for Plug & Play, or 4.88 for Opc Server
-
Locate the application installation directoryFind the installation path by right-clicking the application shortcut and selecting 'Open file location', or check the registry Uninstall key for the InstallLocation valueAffected if The application is installed in a directory writable by standard users (common in C:\Program Files\ or C:\Program Files (x86)\)
-
Identify executable calls made by the applicationExamine configuration files in the installation directory (look for .ini, .cfg, .xml, or .conf files) and check for entries that specify executable paths or commands, noting whether they use absolute or relative pathsAffected if Configuration files contain relative paths or no path prefixes for executables (e.g., 'mytool.exe' instead of 'C:\Program Files\Wut\mytool.exe')
-
Check service or scheduled task configurationsOpen Services.msc to find Wut-related services, right-click and select Properties, then check the 'Path to executable' field. Also check Task Scheduler for any Wut-related tasks under Task Scheduler LibraryAffected if The service executable path or any called programs in service properties use relative paths or depend on PATH environment variable
You are affected if any Wut product (Com Port Redirector Legacy <=3.93, Plug & Play <=4.42, or Opc Server <=4.88) is installed and the application or its services execute programs using relative or PATH-dependent paths that could be exploited through binary planting.
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 absolute path validation for all executable calls and ensure the application uses full, validated paths rather than relying on the system PATH environment variable or relative paths.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-25552 — 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-2024-25552 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