CVE-2024-46639
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 · uneditedA cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in HelpDeskZ v2.0.2 allows attackers to execute arbitrary web scripts or HTML via a crafted payload injected into the Name text field of Custom Fields message box.
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 confidenceA stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in HelpDeskZ v2.0.2 allows authenticated attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript or HTML into the Name text field of Custom Fields. This malicious payload is stored in the database and executed when other users view pages displaying the affected custom fields.
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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Identify HelpDeskZ installationCheck for HelpDeskZ files (typically in web root, look for helpdeskz folder or files like index.php, config.php with 'helpdeskz' references)Affected if HelpDeskZ software is present on the server
-
Confirm HelpDeskZ versionLocate version file or check version disclosed in login page footer, admin dashboard, or changelog file. Compare against v2.0.2Affected if Installed version is v2.0.2 or falls within the affected range around this version
-
Verify custom fields functionality existsLog into HelpDeskZ admin panel and navigate to Custom Fields settings (usually under Settings > Custom Fields or similar). Check if the Custom Fields module is present and accessibleAffected if Custom Fields feature exists and is accessible in the admin interface
-
Inspect Custom Fields Name entries for malicious payloadsQuery the database table storing custom fields (typically 'cfg_custom_fields' or similar). Examine the 'name' field for suspicious patterns like <script>, javascript:, onload, onerror, or encoded charactersAffected if Any Custom Field Name contains executable JavaScript or HTML tags that were not intentionally authored
-
Check for stored XSS execution contextAs an authenticated user (non-admin), navigate to ticket submission or view pages that display custom fields. Inspect page source for unencoded output of custom field namesAffected if Custom Field Name values are rendered without proper HTML encoding
User is affected if HelpDeskZ v2.0.2 is installed and Custom Fields contain injected XSS payloads in the Name field that render without encoding.
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 strict input validation and context-aware output encoding for the Custom Fields Name parameter to neutralize malicious payloads before storage and before rendering.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-46639 — 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-2024-46639 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