CVE-2024-33122
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 · uneditedRoothub v2.6 was discovered to contain a SQL injection vulnerability via the topic parameter in the list() function.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Roothub v2.6 allows attackers to inject malicious SQL queries via the topic parameter in the list() function, potentially enabling unauthorized data access or manipulation.
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= 2.6.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Confirm Roothub installation and versionIdentify the installed Roothub version by checking the application's version file, about page, or API endpoint that returns version information. Compare against the affected version 2.6.0.Affected if The installed Roothub version is exactly 2.6.0
-
Locate the list() function codeSearch the codebase for the list() function definition, particularly in modules or controllers handling topic-related operations. Look for functions that accept a 'topic' parameter.Affected if The list() function exists and accepts a 'topic' parameter without parameterized query handling
-
Verify SQL query construction with topic parameterExamine the list() function implementation to see how the topic parameter is incorporated into SQL queries. Look for direct string concatenation or unsanitized string interpolation in SQL statements.Affected if The topic parameter is directly concatenated into SQL queries without using prepared statements or parameterized queries
-
Check application accessibilityDetermine if the vulnerable list() function is accessible via API endpoints or web routes. Identify the URL path and HTTP methods (GET/POST) that trigger this function.Affected if The list() function with the topic parameter is exposed via accessible web API or endpoint
-
Review input validation on topic parameterInspect any input validation, sanitization, or type checking applied to the topic parameter before it reaches the SQL query. Check for whitelist validation or proper escaping mechanisms.Affected if No input validation or sanitization exists for the topic parameter, or validation can be bypassed
If Roothub version 2.6.0 is installed and the list() function with the topic parameter is accessible without proper parameterized queries or input validation, the environment is affected by this SQL injection vulnerability.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of Roothub; if unavailable, refactor the list() function to use parameterized queries or prepared statements for the topic parameter and implement strict input validation.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-33122 — 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-2024-33122 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