CVE-2024-47801
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 · uneditedSharp and Toshiba Tec MFPs improperly process query parameters in HTTP requests, resulting in a reflected cross-site scripting vulnerability. Accessing a crafted URL which points to an affected product may cause malicious script executed on the web browser.
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 confidenceReflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Sharp and Toshiba Tec MFP web management interfaces where query parameters in HTTP requests are not properly sanitized, allowing attackers to inject malicious JavaScript via crafted URLs that execute in victim browsers.
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<= t1.01.h4.00<= t1.01.h4.00<= t2.12.h3.00all versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Identify MFP model and manufacturerAccess the device web interface or check device inventory/network scan to confirm the exact model (Sharp BP or Toshiba Tec e-Studio series)Affected if model is one of: Sharp BP 90c70, 90c80, 70c65, 70c55, 70c45 or Toshiba Tec E Studio1058, 1208, 908
-
Check device firmware versionLog into the MFP web management interface and navigate to the System Information or Firmware Information page to retrieve the installed firmware versionAffected if firmware version is <= t1.01.h4.00 for E Studio1058/1208, <= t2.12.h3.00 for E Studio908, or any version for Sharp BP series (all versions affected)
-
Verify web management interface is enabledAttempt to access the MFP web interface by entering the device IP address in a browser (default ports 80 or 443)Affected if the web management interface is accessible and responds with a login page
-
Confirm network exposure of management interfaceReview firewall rules, network segmentation, and ACLs to determine if the MFP web interface is reachable from untrusted/networked segments or the internetAffected if the interface is accessible from networks outside trusted administrative zones
You are affected if you have a Sharp BP 70c45/70c55/70c65/90c70/90c80 or Toshiba Tec E Studio1058/1208/908 with the web interface enabled and exposed, and the firmware version falls within or below the affected ranges.
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 dataApply vendor firmware updates when available; until then, disable remote web management interfaces, restrict network access to trusted IPs, and educate users not to click untrusted links pointing to MFP management URLs.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47801 — 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-2024-47801 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