CVE-2024-41735
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 · uneditedSAP Commerce Backoffice does not sufficiently encode user-controlled inputs, resulting in Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability causing low impact on confidentiality and integrity of the application.
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 confidenceSAP Commerce Backoffice fails to properly encode user-controlled inputs before rendering them in web pages, allowing attackers to inject malicious scripts that execute in the context of other users' sessions. This is a stored XSS vulnerability affecting the Backoffice administrative interface.
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= hy_com_2205CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/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.
-
Confirm SAP Commerce Backoffice is installedCheck if the SAP Commerce platform includes the Backoffice component by inspecting the installed modules or checking the product documentationAffected if The Backoffice administrative interface is not present in the environment, the vulnerability does not apply
-
Identify the installed Backoffice versionLocate the Backoffice module version information using SAP Commerce's version check utilities or by examining the module manifest files (such as localextensions.xml or the hy_com_2205 module descriptor)Affected if The installed version is hy_com_2205 exactly - this is the only version listed as affected
-
Verify Backoffice web interface accessibilityConfirm the Backoffice admin interface is accessible by attempting to access the Backoffice URL endpoint (typically /backoffice)Affected if The Backoffice interface is exposed and accessible to users, making the stored XSS exploitable
-
Check for recent suspicious data in BackofficeReview Backoffice database tables or logs for any unexpected script tags, HTML elements, or unusual content that may have been injected via the XSS vulnerabilityAffected if Unencoded user input containing script tags or HTML is found stored in Backoffice data fields
You are affected if SAP Commerce Backoffice version hy_com_2205 is installed and the Backoffice administrative interface is accessible, as this exact version lacks proper output encoding for user-controlled inputs.
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.
From vendor dataImplement proper output encoding for all user-controlled inputs across Backoffice components, using context-appropriate encoding (HTML, URL, JavaScript, CSS) based on where the data is rendered. Validate and sanitize inputs on both client and server sides.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-41735 — 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-2024-41735 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