CVE-2024-33667
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Zammad before 6.3.0. An authenticated agent could perform a remote Denial of Service attack by calling an endpoint that accepts a generic method name, which was not properly sanitized against an allowlist.
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 confidenceZammad before 6.3.0 contains an endpoint that accepts a generic method name parameter without proper allowlist validation. An authenticated agent can exploit this to trigger a remote denial of service by providing a non-allowlisted method name that causes the application to crash or become unresponsive.
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>= 6.2.0, < 6.3.0= 6.3.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 Zammad versionAccess the Zammad admin interface and navigate to About/Information page, or run command: zammad run rails r "puts Rails.application.config.brand_info['version']"Affected if version is >= 6.2.0 and <= 6.3.0 (including 6.3.0 itself)
-
Confirm Zammad installation sourceCheck package manager or installation directory: dpkg -l | grep zammad, rpm -qa | grep zammad, or check /opt/zammad directoryAffected if same version range applies regardless of installation method
-
Verify agent account existenceIn admin panel, go to Users > Agents section, or query database: SELECT login FROM users WHERE role_id IN (SELECT id FROM roles WHERE name = 'Agent') LIMIT 1Affected if at least one agent account exists in the system (required for exploitation)
-
Check for suspicious activity logsReview Zammad log files in /var/log/zammad/production.log or use admin interface for recent events, looking for error patterns involving undefined method callsAffected if logs show frequent method errors or crash-related entries from API calls
You are affected if your Zammad version is 6.2.0 through 6.3.0 (inclusive) and you have at least one authenticated agent account that could be leveraged to send the malformed method parameter request.
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 · scoped6.3.0
Upgrade Zammad to version 6.3.0 or later to obtain the patched version with proper method name allowlist sanitization.
Zammad 6.4.0 or later
- 1. Identify your current Zammad installation version using the admin interface or CLI.
- 2. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade.
- 3. Back up your Zammad database and configuration files.
- 4. Upgrade Zammad to version 6.4.0 or later (the first stable release containing the fix).
- 5. Verify the upgrade was successful by logging in as an agent and confirming normal operation.
- 6. Test that the vulnerable endpoint no longer allows unauthorized method calls.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $3,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-33667 — 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-2024-33667 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