CVE-2024-33500
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 vulnerability has been identified in Mendix Applications using Mendix 10 (All versions < V10.11.0), Mendix Applications using Mendix 10 (V10.6) (All versions < V10.6.9), Mendix Applications using Mendix 9 (All versions >= V9.3.0 < V9.24.22). Affected applications could allow users with the capability to manage a role to elevate the access rights of users with that role. Successful exploitation requires to guess the id of a target role which contains the elevated access rights.
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 confidenceThis is an IDOR (Insecure Direct Object Reference) vulnerability allowing privilege escalation in Mendix applications. Users with role management capabilities can manipulate role IDs to grant elevated access rights to other users by guessing target role IDs. The vulnerability stems from insufficient authorization checks on role management operations.
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
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Mendix application versionLocate the version metadata in the Mendix project file (.mpr) or deployment configuration. In Mendix Cloud deployments, check the environment details in the Mendix Cloud Portal. For on-premise deployments, check the mxversion or model metadata file included with the deployed application.Affected if The installed version is earlier than 9.24.22, 10.6.9, or 10.11.0 (or the version cannot be determined but is known to be from before 2024 updates).
-
Confirm role management functionality is exposedIdentify whether the application exposes any user role management interfaces. Check for published REST/OData services related to role management, or locate any custom role management pages or microflows in the application model that handle role assignments.Affected if The application exposes any role management capability (custom microflows, APIs, or admin pages) that allows modification of user-role associations.
-
Review authorization configuration for role operationsExamine the access rules in the Mendix Modeler for entities and microflows related to user and role management. Specifically check if the member management operations have enforce security enabled and whether the module roles are properly constrained.Affected if Role management microflows or entities lack proper module role access restrictions, or security is not enforced on custom role assignment logic.
A user is affected if their Mendix application version predates the fixed releases AND the application exposes any role management functionality without strict authorization controls on role ID parameters.
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 · scopedUpgrade Mendix applications to V10.11.0, V10.6.9, or V9.24.22 or later depending on the major version branch in use.
Mendix 9.x: upgrade to V9.24.22 or later; Mendix 10.6.x: upgrade to V10.6.9 or later; Mendix 10.x (other): upgrade to V10.11.0 or later
- Identify the current Mendix version of the application (check Mendix Studio Pro or deployment metadata)
- For Mendix 10.x versions < V10.6.9: Upgrade to V10.6.9 or later (recommended: V10.11.0 or later for full coverage)
- For Mendix 10.x versions >= V10.6.9 but < V10.11.0: Upgrade to V10.11.0 or later
- For Mendix 9.x versions >= V9.3.0: Upgrade to V9.24.22 or later
- Create a full backup of the application database and model before upgrading
- Review Mendix Studio Pro upgrade documentation for your specific version transition
- Deploy the upgraded application to a test environment
- Verify that role-based access controls function correctly after upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-33500 — 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-2024-33500 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