CVE-2024-36257
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 · uneditedMattermost versions 9.5.x <= 9.5.5 and 9.8.0, when using shared channels with multiple remote servers connected, fail to check that the remote server A requesting the server B to update the profile picture of a user is the remote that actually has the user as a local one . This allows a malicious remote A to change the profile images of users that belong to another remote server C that is connected to the server A.
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 confidenceMattermost versions 9.5.x through 9.5.5 and 9.8.0 contain an improper validation vulnerability in the shared channels feature. When multiple remote servers are interconnected, the system fails to verify that a remote server requesting a profile picture update is the legitimate owner of that user. This allows a malicious remote server A to manipulate profile images of users belonging to a different remote server C connected to server A.
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>= 9.5.0, < 9.5.6= 9.8.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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.
-
Determine installed Mattermost versionAccess the Mattermost System Console and navigate to About > Mattermost, or check the version via the /api/v4/system endpoint. Compare the version number against the affected ranges: 9.5.0 through 9.5.5 and version 9.8.0.Affected if The installed version is 9.5.0, 9.5.1, 9.5.2, 9.5.3, 9.5.4, 9.5.5, or 9.8.0
-
Verify shared channels feature is enabledIn the Mattermost System Console, go to Environment > Web Server or look for Shared Channels settings. Alternatively, check the config.json file for the 'RemoteCluster' or 'SharedChannels' setting.Affected if Shared channels or remote cluster functionality is enabled in the configuration
-
Identify connected remote serversIn the System Console, navigate to Users > Remote Cluster or Integration > Shared Channels to view the list of connected remote servers. Note how many remote servers are interconnected.Affected if Two or more remote servers are connected through the shared channels feature
A user is affected if their Mattermost version is 9.5.0-9.5.5 or 9.8.0, shared channels are enabled, and multiple remote servers are interconnected.
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 · scoped9.5.6
Upgrade to a patched version of Mattermost (newer than 9.5.5 and 9.8.0). If immediate upgrade is not possible, consider disabling shared channels or restricting which remote servers can connect until the patch can be applied.
9.5.6 or later for 9.5.x branch; 9.8.1 or later for 9.8.x branch
- 1. Identify the current Mattermost server version by checking the system console or running 'mattermost version'
- 2. If running 9.5.0 through 9.5.5, upgrade to Mattermost 9.5.6 or later
- 3. If running 9.8.0, upgrade to the next available stable release (9.8.1 or later)
- 4. Before upgrading, backup the database and configuration files
- 5. Review Mattermost upgrade documentation for your deployment type (hot reload, rolling, or full restart)
- 6. Perform the upgrade following standard Mattermost upgrade procedures
- 7. After upgrade, verify that shared channels functionality works correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,496.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-36257 — 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-2024-36257 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