CVE-2024-35515
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 · uneditedInsecure deserialization in sqlitedict up to v2.1.0 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code.
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 confidencesqlitedict library versions up to v2.1.0 contain an insecure deserialization vulnerability that allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by supplying malicious serialized data.
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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Determine installed sqlitedict versionRun 'pip show sqlitedict' or 'pip list | grep sqlitedict' to see the installed versionAffected if Version is 2.1.0 or lower, or any version without the deserialization fix
-
Identify if sqlitedict loads data from external sourcesReview application code to see if sqlitedict is used to load or deserialize data from user input, files from untrusted locations, network sources, or databases that could contain malicious serialized dataAffected if sqlitedict deserializes data from any untrusted or external source without validation
-
Check the serializer configuration in useSearch codebase for sqlitedict usage patterns: look for SqliteDict instantiation and examine the 'serializer' parameter (defaults to pickle in vulnerable versions)Affected if The application uses the default pickle serializer or any unsafe deserialization method with sqlitedict
-
Inspect application data flow for sqlitedict deserializationSearch for code paths where data retrieved from sqlitedict is immediately passed to pickle.loads() or similar deserialization functions without validationAffected if Application deserializes data from sqlitedict using unsafe methods without validating the source or content
You are affected if sqlitedict version is 2.1.0 or lower AND the library is used to deserialize data from untrusted or external sources using pickle or an unsafe serializer.
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 sqlitedict to a version newer than v2.1.0 where the deserialization flaw has been addressed.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-35515 — 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-2024-35515 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