CVE-2024-56828
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 · uneditedFile Upload vulnerability in ChestnutCMS through 1.5.0. Based on the code analysis, it was determined that the /api/member/avatar API endpoint receives a base64 string as input. This string is then passed to the memberService.uploadAvatarByBase64 method for processing. Within the service, the base64-encoded image is parsed. For example, given a string like:  the content after the comma is extracted and decoded using Base64.getDecoder().decode(). The substring from the 11th character up to the first occurrence of a semicolon (;) is assigned to the suffix variable (representing the file extension). The decoded content is then written to a file. However, the file extension is not validated, and since this functionality is exposed to the frontend, it poses significant security risks.
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 analysisThe application accepts uploaded files without properly checking their type or content, so an attacker can upload something executable. If it lands where the server will run it, that is remote code execution. Remediating it means validating content rather than just the extension, storing uploads outside the web root, and never executing them.
General guidance for the unrestricted file upload class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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<= 1.5.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 · scopedChestnutCMS 1.5.1 or later (check official releases)
- 1. Check the official ChestnutCMS release repository (GitHub/Gitee) for version 1.5.1 or later which should contain the security fix
- 2. If a fixed version is available, update your pom.xml or build configuration to reference the new version
- 3. Rebuild and redeploy the application
- 4. Verify the /api/member/avatar endpoint now properly validates file extensions against an allowlist (e.g., jpg, png, gif, webp)
- 5. Test that attempting to upload files with dangerous extensions (html, js, jsp, exe) is rejected
- 6. Ensure the upload directory is not configured as executable and files are not served with script-handler permissions
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-56828 — 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-2024-56828 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