CVE-2024-29511
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 · uneditedArtifex Ghostscript before 10.03.1, when Tesseract is used for OCR, has a directory traversal issue that allows arbitrary file reading (and writing of error messages to arbitrary files) via OCRLanguage. For example, exploitation can use debug_file /tmp/out and user_patterns_file /etc/passwd.
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 confidenceA directory traversal vulnerability in Artifex Ghostscript versions before 10.03.1 allows authenticated attackers to read arbitrary files and write error messages to arbitrary locations via the OCRLanguage parameter when Tesseract OCR is enabled. The attack exploits the debug_file and user_patterns_file parameters to access sensitive files such as /etc/passwd.
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< 10.03.1CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Ghostscript versionRun 'gs --version' or 'gs -v' to retrieve the installed Ghostscript version numberAffected if Version is below 10.03.1
-
Confirm Tesseract OCR support is enabledRun 'gs -h' or 'gs --help' and search the output for tesseract or ocr-related devices, options, or featuresAffected if Tesseract OCR support appears in the Ghostscript help output, indicating it is enabled
-
Verify tesseract binary availabilityCheck if the tesseract binary exists on the system (typically at /usr/bin/tesseract or via 'which tesseract') and check if Ghostscript is linked to tesseract librariesAffected if Tesseract is installed and Ghostscript has OCR integration compiled in
A system is affected only if Ghostscript version is below 10.03.1 AND Tesseract OCR support is enabled in that Ghostscript installation
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.
dbcve · scoped10.03.1
Upgrade Ghostscript to version 10.03.1 or later. If upgrading is not immediately possible, disable Tesseract OCR integration in Ghostscript and restrict access to the Ghostscript interpreter to trusted users only.
Ghostscript 10.03.1 or later
- 1. Check current Ghostscript version by running: gs --version
- 2. If version is below 10.03.1, upgrade Ghostscript to version 10.03.1 or later using your system's package manager or by downloading from the official Ghostscript website (https://www.ghostscript.com/)
- 3. Verify the upgrade was successful by running: gs --version
- 4. Confirm the vulnerability is patched by testing that the OCR functionality no longer allows directory traversal via OCRLanguage parameters such as debug_file, user_patterns_file, or similar paths
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,072.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-29511 — 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-2024-29511 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