CVE-2024-42845
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 · uneditedAn eval Injection vulnerability in the component invesalius/reader/dicom.py of InVesalius 3.1.99991 through 3.1.99998 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via loading a crafted DICOM file.
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 confidenceAn eval Injection vulnerability exists in the DICOM file reader component (invesalius/reader/dicom.py) of InVesalius versions 3.1.99991 through 3.1.99998. The vulnerability allows arbitrary code execution by loading a crafted DICOM file, likely due to unsafe use of Python's eval() function on DICOM field data.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check InVesalius versionRun 'pip show invesalius3' or check the application's About/Help section for the version numberAffected if The version is 3.1.99991 through 3.1.99998 (inclusive)
-
Locate the DICOM reader fileFind the file 'reader/dicom.py' within the InVesalius installation directory - common paths include /usr/share/invesalius/ or the Python site-packages folderAffected if The file exists in the expected location within the InVesalius installation
-
Inspect for unsafe eval() usageOpen the dicom.py file and search for 'eval(' calls, particularly those processing DICOM field data or tag valuesAffected if The file contains eval() calls used on DICOM tag data without safe parsing methods
-
Verify DICOM import functionalityAttempt to load a DICOM file using InVesalius import or file open functionalityAffected if The application can load DICOM files and processes them through the vulnerable reader component
A user is affected if they are running InVesalius versions 3.1.99991 through 3.1.99998 and use the DICOM file loading feature with the vulnerable eval() implementation present in the reader/dicom.py file.
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 dataReplace unsafe eval() calls in the DICOM parser with safe parsing methods (e.g., ast.literal_eval for literals, or structured parsing libraries). Validate and sanitize all DICOM field data before processing.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,896.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-42845 — 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-2024-42845 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