CVE-2024-38448
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 · uneditedhtags in GNU Global through 6.6.12 allows code execution in situations where dbpath (aka -d) is untrusted, because shell metacharacters may be used.
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 confidenceThe htags component in GNU Global through 6.6.12 suffers from a command injection vulnerability. When the dbpath parameter (-d) is populated with untrusted input, shell metacharacters are not sanitized before being passed to a shell command, allowing arbitrary code execution.
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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Confirm GNU Global/htags is installedRun 'gtags --version' or 'htags --version' to determine installed versionAffected if Version is 6.6.12 or earlier (vulnerable release range)
-
Identify htags usage with -d parameterSearch scripts, configs, or automation that invoke htags with the -d flag (e.g., 'htags -d $USER_INPUT')Affected if htags is invoked with a -d argument that accepts external/untrusted input
-
Check for unsafe command executionInspect source code or wrapper scripts that call htags; look for system(), popen(), or shell=True patterns that pass the dbpath argumentAffected if Shell interpretation is used (system/popen) rather than execve with explicit arguments
-
Audit input source for -d parameterTrace where the dbpath value originates - if from user input, HTTP parameters, files, or environment variables without validationAffected if The -d value is derived from untrusted sources without sanitization of shell metacharacters
A user is affected if GNU Global version is 6.6.12 or earlier AND htags is being run with a -d parameter that accepts untrusted input through unsafe shell execution.
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 · scopedEnsure dbpath (-d) input is validated and sanitized before use, or use safe command execution methods that avoid shell interpretation (e.g., execve with explicit arguments instead of system/popen).
GNU Global version greater than 6.6.12 (check official GNU Savannah for latest stable release)
- 1. Check the current version of GNU Global installed: `global --version`
- 2. Identify the latest stable release of GNU Global from the official GNU Savannah repository at https://www.gnu.org/software/global/
- 3. Download and install the latest version (after 6.6.12) that addresses the code injection vulnerability in htags via the -d/dbpath parameter
- 4. Verify the new version is installed: `global --version`
- 5. Test that shell metacharacters in the -d parameter are now properly sanitized or rejected
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-38448 — 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-2024-38448 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