Improper Privilege ManagementWeakness · CWE-269

CVE-2024-27357

MEDIUM · 5.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-07-26
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
58/100
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
An issue was discovered in WithSecure Elements Agent through 23.x for macOS, WithSecure Elements Client Security through 23.x for macOS, and WithSecure MDR through 23.x for macOS. Local Privilege Escalation can occur during installations or updates by admins.

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 confidence

Local Privilege Escalation vulnerability in WithSecure Elements products for macOS. During installation or update processes performed by administrators, the software fails to properly handle privilege boundaries, allowing a local attacker with admin-level access to escalate to higher system privileges. This appears to be a flaw in how the installer manages elevated privileges during the install/update workflow.

MitigationApply vendor patches/updates for the affected WithSecure products (Elements Agent, Client Security, and MDR) to address the privilege escalation issue. Until patched, minimize the number of admin accounts and review installation/update procedures to ensure they follow least-privilege principles.

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
High
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 installed WithSecure products
    Run 'ls /Applications | grep -i withsecure' or check /Library/Application Support/WithSecure for product directories. Also run 'pkgutil --pkg-info' for WithSecure-related packages.
    Affected if Any WithSecure Elements, Client Security, or MDR product for macOS is installed
  2. Determine installed version
    Run 'defaults read /Applications/WithSecure\ Element\ Agent.app/Contents/Info CFBundleVersion' or check the app's Info.plist for CFBundleShortVersionString. For command-line tools, check 'which fssp' and its version with '--version'.
    Affected if Version cannot be determined or is unknown/older
  3. Compare version to vendor advisories
    Check WithSecure support portals or security advisories for CVE-2024-27357 for the specific fixed version numbers. Compare your installed version against those published ranges.
    Affected if Installed version is lower than the vendor-stated fixed version or no patch version is documented
  4. Check for recent installation or update activity
    Review /var/log/install.log or use 'log show --predicate 'eventMessage contains "WithSecure"' --last 30d' for recent install/update events. Check if installation was performed recently.
    Affected if Installation or update occurred recently and version is unpatched
  5. Verify presence of admin-level accounts
    Run 'dscl . -list /Users' and check 'dscl . -read /Users/adminname' for admin privileges. Exploitation requires an admin-level local account.
    Affected if Multiple admin accounts exist or non-privileged users have admin access

A user is affected if they have any unpatched WithSecure Elements, Client Security, or MDR product for macOS installed, with an admin-level account present on the system.

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

Apply vendor patches/updates for the affected WithSecure products (Elements Agent, Client Security, and MDR) to address the privilege escalation issue. Until patched, minimize the number of admin accounts and review installation/update procedures to ensure they follow least-privilege principles.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
21.0 hours of engineering $3,680
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-27357 — 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-2024-27357 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