OS Command InjectionWeakness · CWE-78

CVE-2024-36360

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-06-11
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
OS command injection vulnerability exists in awkblog v0.0.1 (commit hash:7b761b192d0e0dc3eef0f30630e00ece01c8d552) and earlier. If a remote unauthenticated attacker sends a specially crafted HTTP request, an arbitrary OS command may be executed with the privileges of the affected product on the machine running the product.

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 confidence

OS command injection vulnerability in awkblog v0.0.1 allows remote unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands via specially crafted HTTP requests. The vulnerability exists in how the application processes HTTP input and passes it to system-level commands without proper sanitization.

MitigationUpgrade to a patched version of awkblog that implements proper input validation and uses safe command execution methods (e.g., avoiding shell commands, using parameterized APIs). If no patch available, disable the affected service and implement network-level filtering until remediation is possible.

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if awkblog is installed
    Search for awkblog in installed packages, running services, or application directories. Common locations include /opt, /usr/local, or home directories. Check process lists for awkblog-related processes.
    Affected if awkblog is present and running on the system
  2. Determine the installed version
    Check the version of awkblog by examining package metadata, the application source code (version file, pyproject.toml, package.json), or by querying the running service if it exposes version information.
    Affected if The installed version is v0.0.1 or the version cannot be determined (indicating an unpatched state)
  3. Verify network exposure of the web service
    Check if the awkblog HTTP service is bound to a network interface (0.0.0.0) or is accessible externally. Review firewall rules and service configuration for listening address.
    Affected if The service is accessible from the network without authentication
  4. Inspect HTTP input handling for command injection vectors
    Examine the application source code for code paths where HTTP request parameters (query strings, headers, body) are passed to shell commands, system(), exec(), or similar functions without sanitization. Focus on areas handling blog post or content processing.
    Affected if Code passes unsanitized HTTP input directly to system execution functions (system(), exec(), popen(), shell=True in subprocess)
  5. Check for anomalous network activity
    Review HTTP access logs for unusual requests containing shell metacharacters (;, |, &, $, backticks, $( ), redirection operators) in parameters that should contain normal content.
    Affected if Logs show requests with shell metacharacters in input fields, especially if followed by unexpected system behavior

You are affected if awkblog v0.0.1 is installed and its web interface is network-accessible, as the vulnerability allows unauthenticated remote command execution through unsanitized HTTP input.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to a patched version of awkblog that implements proper input validation and uses safe command execution methods (e.g., avoiding shell commands, using parameterized APIs). If no patch available, disable the affected service and implement network-level filtering until remediation is possible.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-36360 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-36360 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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