dbcve.org
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2024-39163

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-12-04
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
binux pyspider up to v0.3.10 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the Flask endpoints.

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 · low confidence

A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the Flask-based web interface of pyspider up to version v0.3.10. This allows attackers to trick authenticated users into executing unintended actions through malicious requests to Flask endpoints.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens (e.g., via Flask-WTF) on all Flask endpoints and ensure token validation on state-changing operations.

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
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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. Check if pyspider is installed
    Run 'pip show pyspider' or 'pip list | grep pyspider' to see if the package is present in the environment
    Affected if pyspider package is found in the Python environment
  2. Determine pyspider version
    Look at the version field from the previous pip show command output
    Affected if Version is v0.3.10 or any version lower (e.g., 0.3.9, 0.3.8, etc.)
  3. Check if web UI component is enabled
    Inspect pyspider configuration files (typically in ~/.pyspider/pyspider.conf or /etc/pyspider/pyspider.conf) and look for 'webui' or 'web' settings, or check if the web interface port (usually 5000) is listening with 'netstat -tlnp | grep 5000' or 'ss -tlnp | grep 5000'
    Affected if The web UI component is enabled and listening on a network port
  4. Verify anti-CSRF protection is absent
    Examine the pyspider source code in the webui directory (typically in site-packages/pyspider/webui/) or check if Flask-WTF is listed in requirements, and inspect forms or endpoints for csrf_token or similar token validation
    Affected if No anti-CSRF tokens (such as Flask-WTF csrf_token) are implemented on Flask endpoints handling state-changing operations

A user is affected if pyspider version v0.3.10 or lower is installed with the Flask-based web UI enabled and no anti-CSRF protection is present on the endpoints.

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

Implement anti-CSRF tokens (e.g., via Flask-WTF) on all Flask endpoints and ensure token validation on state-changing operations.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,800
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,480.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-39163 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2024-39163 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