CVE-2024-53844
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 · uneditedE.D.D.I (Enhanced Dialog Driven Interface) is a middleware to connect and manage LLM API bots. A path traversal vulnerability exists in the backup export functionality of EDDI, as implemented in `RestExportService.java`. This vulnerability allows an attacker to access sensitive files on the server by manipulating the `botFilename` parameter in requests. The application fails to sanitize user input, enabling malicious inputs such as `..%2f..%2fetc%2fpasswd` to access arbitrary files. However, the **severity of this vulnerability is significantly limited** because EDDI typically runs within a **Docker container**, which provides additional layers of isolation and restricted permissions. As a result, while this vulnerability exposes files within the container, it does not inherently threaten the underlying host system or other containers. A patch is required to sanitize and validate the botFilename input parameter. Users should ensure they are using version 5.4 which contains this patdch. For temporary mitigation, access to the vulnerable endpoint should be restricted through firewall rules or authentication mechanisms.
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 confidenceA path traversal vulnerability exists in EDDI's backup export functionality in `RestExportService.java`. The `botFilename` parameter lacks input sanitization, allowing attackers to use path traversal sequences like `..%2f..%2fetc%2fpasswd` to read arbitrary files on the server. While severity is limited by Docker container isolation, the vulnerability still exposes sensitive files within the container environment.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 if EDDI application is runningCheck for Java processes running EDDI, or list Docker containers that may contain EDDI (docker ps). Look for processes named 'eddi' or containers with 'eddi' in the image name.Affected if EDDI is running as a Java process or Docker container
-
Determine the installed EDDI versionCheck the EDDI application version by reviewing application logs, the startup banner, a version API endpoint if available, or the manifest/file version in the installation directory.Affected if Version is below 5.4 or the version cannot be determined (unknown)
-
Verify the backup export endpoint is accessibleAttempt to access the REST API backup export endpoint (typically paths containing '/api/' and 'export' or 'backup'). Check if the endpoint responds without authentication or with current credentials.Affected if The backup export REST endpoint is reachable and responds to requests
-
Check if botFilename parameter accepts path traversalSend a test request to the backup export endpoint with a path traversal sequence in the botFilename parameter (such as ..%2f..%2ftest or ../../test). Inspect the application's response and any logs for evidence of path traversal processing.Affected if The application accepts and processes path traversal sequences in the botFilename parameter without rejecting them
You are affected if EDDI is running with a version below 5.4 and the backup export endpoint (using the botFilename parameter) is accessible, as the parameter lacks input sanitization for path traversal sequences.
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 · scopedPrimary: Upgrade to version 5.4 which contains the patch to sanitize and validate the botFilename parameter. Temporary: Restrict access to the vulnerable endpoint via firewall rules or authentication until the patch is applied.
5.4
- Upgrade E.D.D.I to version 5.4 which contains the patch to sanitize and validate the botFilename input parameter
- After upgrading, verify the vulnerability is no longer present by testing with a safe, non-exploitative request to confirm proper input handling
- If immediate upgrade is not possible, temporarily mitigate by restricting network access to the backup export endpoint through firewall rules or ensuring strong authentication is in place
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-53844 — 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-2024-53844 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