CVE-2024-47003
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 · uneditedMattermost versions 9.11.x <= 9.11.0 and 9.5.x <= 9.5.8 fail to validate that the message of the permalink post is a string, which allows an attacker to send a non-string value as the message of a permalink post and crash the frontend.
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 confidenceMattermost versions 9.11.x and 9.5.x fail to validate that the message field of a permalink post is a string type, allowing an attacker to send a non-string value (e.g., object, array, number) which causes the frontend to crash when it attempts to render the invalid message data.
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>= 9.5.0, < 9.5.9= 9.11.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Determine Mattermost Server versionRun the command: `mattermost version` or check the server logs at startup, or look in the system console under About > MattermostAffected if The displayed version falls within 9.5.0 through 9.5.9, or is exactly 9.11.0
-
Verify the exact minor versionCompare the full version string (e.g., 9.5.3 or 9.11.0) against the affected ranges: 9.5.0 <= version < 9.5.9 OR version = 9.11.0Affected if The version matches any of these vulnerable ranges
You are affected if your Mattermost Server version is 9.5.0 through 9.5.9 inclusive, or exactly 9.11.0, as these versions lack server-side type validation for the permalink post message field.
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 · scoped9.5.9
Upgrade to Mattermost 9.11.1+ (for 9.11.x) or 9.5.9+ (for 9.5.x), or apply a patch that adds server-side type validation ensuring the permalink post message field is a string before processing.
Upgrade to Mattermost Server 9.5.9+ (for 9.5.x branch) or 9.11.1+ (for 9.11.x branch)
- Backup your Mattermost Server database and configuration files before upgrading
- Identify your current Mattermost version by checking the System Console > About page
- For Mattermost 9.5.x (versions 9.5.0-9.5.8): Upgrade to version 9.5.9 or later in the 9.5.x branch
- For Mattermost 9.11.0 specifically: Upgrade to version 9.11.1 or later in the 9.11.x branch
- Follow the standard Mattermost upgrade procedure for your deployment method (e.g., Ansible, Docker, Kubernetes, or manual upgrade)
- After upgrade, verify the server is running and the frontend loads correctly
- Test that permalink posts with various message types are handled correctly without crashing
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47003 — 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-2024-47003 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