CVE-2024-37369
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 privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the affected product. The vulnerability allows low-privilege users to edit scripts, bypassing Access Control Lists, and potentially gaining further access within the system.
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 confidenceThis is a privilege escalation vulnerability where low-privilege users can edit scripts by bypassing Access Control Lists (ACLs). The ACL mechanism that should restrict script modification to authorized users is being circumvented, allowing any low-privilege user to modify scripts and potentially execute arbitrary code or gain further system access.
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>= 12.0, < 14.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify Factorytalk View versionCheck the installed version of Factorytalk View in Windows Programs and Features or the application About dialog. Look for the exact version number (e.g., 12.0.0, 13.0.0).Affected if The installed version is 12.0.x or any 13.x version (12.0 <= version < 14.0)
-
Confirm script editor feature is presentVerify that the Factorytalk View installation includes script editing capabilities. Check if the Script Editor component is installed by examining the application feature set or program files directory for script-related modules.Affected if Script editing features are installed and available to users
-
Review user account privilegesExamine the Windows user accounts that have access to the Factorytalk View application. Identify any accounts that are considered low-privilege (non-administrator) but may have application-level access.Affected if Low-privilege (non-admin) users have application access and can potentially reach script functionality
-
Inspect script file ACLsLocate script files or script directories within the Factorytalk View workspace. Right-click to view Properties and examine the Security tab to see which users or groups have Write or Modify permissions on script-related files.Affected if Any low-privilege user account has Write or Modify permissions on script files when they should only have Read access
A user is affected if Factorytalk View version is 12.0 or higher but below 14.0, script editing is enabled, and low-privilege users have write access to script files that should be restricted by ACLs.
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 · scoped14.0
Restrict script editing permissions to only authorized administrators and ensure ACLs are properly enforced on all script operations. Implement proper authorization checks before allowing any script modifications.
Factorytalk View version 14.0
- Back up all Factorytalk View project files and configurations before proceeding with any changes
- Verify system requirements and compatibility for Factorytalk View version 14.0
- Create a test environment to validate the upgrade process and application functionality
- Obtain the Factorytalk View version 14.0 installer from the official Rockwell Automation download portal
- Uninstall the current Factorytalk View version (12.0 through 13.x) from the system
- Install Factorytalk View version 14.0 following the official installation guide
- Restore project files from the backup created in step 1
- Verify that Access Control Lists are properly configured and low-privilege users can no longer edit scripts
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 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 $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-37369 — 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-2024-37369 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