CVE-2024-4872
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 vulnerability exists in the query validation of the MicroSCADA Pro/X SYS600 product. If exploited this could allow an authenticated attacker to inject code towards persistent data. Note that to successfully exploit this vulnerability an attacker must have a valid credential.
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 confidenceA code injection vulnerability exists in the query validation logic of MicroSCADA Pro/X SYS600. An authenticated attacker with valid credentials can inject malicious code through queries that gets stored in persistent data (likely database or configuration storage). This could allow arbitrary code execution or data manipulation within the SCADA application.
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= 9.4>= 10.0, < 10.6CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Identify installed MicroSCADA productLocate the SYS600 installation directory or check installed programs list for 'MicroSCADA Pro' or 'MicroSCADA X'Affected if Neither MicroSCADA Pro nor MicroSCADA X is installed on the system
-
Determine SYS600 versionAccess the application version information through the About dialog, help menu, or version file within the installation directoryAffected if The version is 9.4 (Pro) or between 10.0 and 10.5.x inclusive (X)
-
Verify query validation feature is accessibleCheck if the query builder or data query interface is available to authenticated users in the SCADA application configurationAffected if Query validation logic is enabled and accessible to standard authenticated users
-
Confirm authentication configurationReview user account settings and authentication mechanisms in the SYS600 configuration or user management moduleAffected if Multiple user accounts exist with permissions to execute queries against the system
-
Inspect persistent data storageExamine database tables or configuration files where queries may be stored for any unexpected or obfuscated entriesAffected if Suspicious stored queries or configurations containing encoded characters are present
You are affected if MicroSCADA Pro 9.4 or MicroSCADA X versions 10.0-10.5.x is installed and the query validation feature is accessible to authenticated users
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 data10.6
Implement proper input validation and parameterized queries/prepared statements in the query validation layer. Apply any vendor-supplied patches for SYS600 and review authentication controls to limit credential exposure.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-4872 — 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-2024-4872 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