CVE-2024-46976
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 · uneditedBackstage is an open framework for building developer portals. An attacker with control of the contents of the TechDocs storage buckets is able to inject executable scripts in the TechDocs content that will be executed in the victim's browser when browsing documentation or navigating to an attacker provided link. This has been fixed in the 1.10.13 release of the `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend` package. users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
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 confidenceThis is a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Backstage's TechDocs feature. An attacker who can control the contents of TechDocs storage buckets (such as S3, GCS, or Azure Blob Storage) can inject malicious scripts into documentation content. When users view the affected documentation or click attacker-provided links, the injected scripts execute in their browsers, potentially enabling session hijacking or data 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< 1.10.13CVSS 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.
-
Check Backstage versionInspect your package.json or node_modules/@backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend/package.json to find the installed version. Alternatively, run `npm list @backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend` in your Backstage project directory.Affected if The installed version is lower than 1.10.13 (for example, 1.10.12, 1.9.0, etc.)
-
Confirm TechDocs is enabledCheck your Backstage configuration files (typically app-config.yaml or app-config.local.yaml) for the `techdocs:` section. Also verify that the @backstage/plugin-techdocs and @backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend packages are present in your dependencies.Affected if TechDocs is configured and active in your Backstage instance; the vulnerability only applies when TechDocs is enabled.
-
Identify TechDocs storage backendReview your app-config.yaml under `techdocs.builder` and `techdocs.storageUrl` (or equivalent cloud storage configuration) to determine whether documentation is stored in S3, GCS, Azure Blob Storage, or local filesystem.Affected if The storage backend is a cloud service (S3, GCS, or Azure Blob Storage) that could potentially be accessed by an attacker to inject malicious content.
-
Review documentation content for suspicious scriptsIf you have access to the TechDocs storage bucket or local storage directory, examine markdown or HTML files for unexpected `<script>` tags, javascript: URLs, or event handler attributes (onclick, onerror, etc.) embedded in documentation files.Affected if Any documentation content contains injected script tags or malicious JavaScript that was not authored by your documentation team.
You are affected if your Backstage deployment uses TechDocs with a version of @backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend lower than 1.10.13 and an attacker could inject content into your documentation storage bucket.
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 · scoped1.10.13
Upgrade the `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend` package to version 1.10.13 or later. There are no available workarounds.
@backstage/[email protected] or later
- Identify the current version of `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend` in your project's dependencies (check package.json or yarn.lock/npm-shrinkwrap.json)
- Update `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-backend` to version 1.10.13 or later in your package.json
- Run your package manager to install the updated dependency (e.g., `yarn install` or `npm install`)
- Verify the updated version is installed correctly
- Rebuild and redeploy your Backstage instance to apply the changes
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-46976 — 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-2024-46976 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