dbcve.org
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2024-51144

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-03-05
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the 'pvmsg.php?action=add_message', pvmsg.php?action=confirm_delete , and ajax.server.php?page=user&action=flip_follow endpoints in Ampache <= 6.6.0.

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 confidence

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Ampache <= 6.6.0 allows attackers to trick authenticated users into performing unintended actions on three endpoints: pvmsg.php (add_message, confirm_delete) and ajax.server.php (flip_follow). The lack of anti-CSRF token validation on these endpoints enables malicious requests to be forged on behalf of authenticated users.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations at the affected endpoints, validate Origin/Referer headers server-side, and configure SameSite attributes on session cookies.

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
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check Ampache version
    Locate the version file or admin panel in your Ampache installation. Common locations include a version.php file in the root directory or displayed in the admin interface under System or About section. Compare the installed version to 6.6.0 - any version equal to or below 6.6.0 is affected.
    Affected if Installed version is Ampache <= 6.6.0
  2. Inspect pvmsg.php for CSRF token validation
    Examine the source code of pvmsg.php, specifically the handling code for the 'add_message' and 'confirm_delete' actions. Search for presence of CSRF token validation logic (such as checking a token parameter, session token comparison, or function calls like validateCsrfToken).
    Affected if No anti-CSRF token validation is found for add_message or confirm_delete actions in pvmsg.php
  3. Inspect ajax.server.php for CSRF token validation
    Examine the source code of ajax.server.php, specifically the handling code for the 'flip_follow' action. Search for presence of CSRF token validation logic similar to above.
    Affected if No anti-CSRF token validation is found for flip_follow action in ajax.server.php
  4. Check session cookie configuration
    Inspect your session cookie configuration (in config.php or similar). Look for SameSite attribute setting on the session cookie. While this is a secondary defense, its absence indicates partial mitigation is missing.
    Affected if SameSite attribute is not set on session cookies

Your Ampache installation is affected if it is version 6.6.0 or lower AND the three endpoints (pvmsg.php add_message, pvmsg.php confirm_delete, ajax.server.php flip_follow) lack anti-CSRF token validation in their source code.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations at the affected endpoints, validate Origin/Referer headers server-side, and configure SameSite attributes on session cookies.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

Ampache > 6.6.0 (verify latest stable release on github.com/ampache/ampache)

  1. Verify your current Ampache version by checking the admin panel or version file
  2. Check the official Ampache GitHub repository (github.com/ampache/ampache) for releases after version 6.6.0
  3. Download and review the release notes for versions above 6.6.0 to confirm CSRF fixes are included
  4. Create a full backup of your Ampache database and configuration files
  5. Test the upgrade in a staging environment before applying to production
  6. Apply the upgrade following standard Ampache upgrade procedures
  7. Verify that the vulnerable endpoints (pvmsg.php?action=add_message, pvmsg.php?action=confirm_delete, ajax.server.php?page=user&action=flip_follow) now require CSRF tokens
  8. Confirm the new version is running and all functionality works correctly
Caveat Review release notes for any database schema changes or configuration updates required during upgrade

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
13.0 hours of engineering $2,290
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,664.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-51144 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-51144 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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