CVE-2024-41746
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 · uneditedIBM CICS TX Advanced 10.1, 11.1, and Standard 11.1 is vulnerable to stored cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session.
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 confidenceIBM CICS TX Advanced and Standard versions contain a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the web interface. Attackers can embed malicious JavaScript code that gets persisted on the server and executed in the browsers of other users viewing the affected content, potentially leading to session hijacking and credential theft.
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= 10.1= 11.1.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Verify IBM CICS TX versionLocate and inspect the installed IBM CICS TX version using the product's built-in version reporting mechanism or system information tool. This is typically accessible via the product's console, installation directory, or system properties.Affected if The installed version matches 10.1 or 11.1.0.0 exactly.
-
Confirm web interface is enabledCheck the IBM CICS TX configuration to determine whether the web interface component is currently enabled and running.Affected if The web interface is enabled and accessible to users.
-
Assess web interface exposureDetermine the network exposure of the web interface by reviewing network bindings, firewall rules, or access control lists that govern who can reach the web interface.Affected if The web interface is reachable from untrusted networks or allows authentication by users who could inject malicious content.
-
Review web interface logs for suspicious inputExamine IBM CICS TX web interface logs for entries containing unusual JavaScript tags, event handlers, or script patterns in user-submitted fields.Affected if Log entries contain encoded or plain-text patterns resembling XSS payloads in user input fields.
-
Inspect stored user content for XSS payloadsIf the web interface allows users to create or store content (such as messages, comments, or custom fields), review the stored data for presence of script tags, javascript: URIs, or event handler attributes.Affected if Stored content in the web interface contains executable script code or suspicious HTML elements.
You are affected if you are running IBM CICS TX version 10.1 or 11.1.0.0 with the web interface enabled and accessible to users who can submit or store content.
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 · scopedApply IBM's security patches for this vulnerability. Implement output encoding and input validation on user-supplied content in the web interface. Consider deploying a WAF rule as an additional layer of defense until the patch is fully deployed.
CICS TX 11.1.0.1 or later (latest supported release)
- 1. Identify the current installed version of IBM CICS TX by checking the product documentation or system information
- 2. Navigate to IBM Fix Central (https://www.ibm.com/support/fixcentral) and search for IBM CICS TX security patches
- 3. Apply the latest available security fix for CVE-2024-41746 or upgrade to a version beyond 11.1.0.0 that includes the vulnerability fix
- 4. After applying the fix, clear browser cache and cookies to prevent any stale session data
- 5. Test the Web UI functionality to confirm the XSS mitigation is working properly
- 6. Verify that the fix does not introduce regressions in the application
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-41746 — 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-2024-41746 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