CVE-2024-4336
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 · uneditedAdive Framework 2.0.8, does not sufficiently encode user-controlled inputs, resulting in a persistent Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the /adive/admin/tables/add, in multiple parameters. An attacker could retrieve the session details of an authenticated user.
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 confidenceAdive Framework 2.0.8 contains a persistent Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the admin interface at /adive/admin/tables/add where user-controlled inputs are not properly sanitized or encoded. This allows attackers to inject malicious scripts that execute in authenticated users' browsers, potentially enabling session hijacking and retrieval of session details.
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= 2.0.8CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:N/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 Adive Framework installation and versionLocate the Adive Framework installation and check the version file (commonly version.php, composer.json, or similar version manifest in the application root)Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.0.8
-
Verify admin interface accessibilityAttempt to access the /adive/admin/tables/add endpoint via HTTP request (requires authentication)Affected if The endpoint responds and is accessible to authenticated admin users
-
Check for unauthenticated access to admin routesExamine application routing configuration and any access control lists to determine if /adive/admin/ routes are protected by authenticationAffected if The admin interface or specific endpoint is accessible without proper authentication (additional exposure)
-
Identify user input handling at vulnerable endpointReview the source code at /adive/admin/tables/add or the related controller handling this route to see if user inputs are passed to the view without sanitizationAffected if User-supplied parameters in the add table function are rendered without output encoding (indicates vulnerability is present)
A user is affected if they are running exactly Adive Framework version 2.0.8 and the admin interface at /adive/admin/tables/add is accessible to authenticated users, as the stored XSS vulnerability exists in unsanitized user inputs at that endpoint.
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 input validation and output encoding for all user-controlled parameters at the affected endpoint. Use context-appropriate encoding (HTML, JavaScript, URL) based on where the data is rendered, and consider implementing Content Security Policy headers as defense-in-depth.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-4336 — 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-2024-4336 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