CVE-2024-6047
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 · uneditedCertain EOL GeoVision devices fail to properly filter user input for the specific functionality. Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit this vulnerability to inject and execute arbitrary system commands on the device.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in end-of-life GeoVision devices allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary system commands due to improper user input filtering in specific device functionality.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- 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
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 GeoVision device model on networkUse network scanning (nmap, device discovery tools) or check device documentation to identify the exact model number of any GeoVision devices. Look for: GV DSP LPR, GV BX130, GV BX1500, GV CB220, GV EBL1100, GV EFD1100, GV FD2410, or GV FD3400.Affected if The device model matches one of the eight affected models listed in the CVE.
-
Confirm device firmware versionAccess the device web interface or use SNMP/CLI to query the firmware version. Common paths: device status page in web UI, or command output from device console/Telnet/SSH if available.Affected if The device is a GeoVision product with any firmware version (all versions are affected per the CVE).
-
Assess network accessibilityCheck if the device is reachable from network segments outside the local management VLAN. Test with ping, port scans (common web ports 80/443), or review firewall rules and network segmentation policies.Affected if The affected GeoVision device is directly accessible from untrusted networks without firewall filtering.
-
Verify authentication exposureDetermine if the vulnerable functionality accepts requests without requiring authentication. Since the CVE specifies unauthenticated remote command injection, check if the device HTTP/HTTPS interface is exposed without VPN or authentication gateway.Affected if The device management interface is exposed to the internet or untrusted internal networks without authentication controls.
If your environment contains any of the eight listed GeoVision devices (GV DSP LPR, BX130, BX1500, CB220, EBL1100, EFD1100, FD2410, FD3400) and they are network-accessible from untrusted networks, you are affected by this command injection vulnerability.
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 · scopedSince these devices are End-of-Life and cannot receive vendor patches, replace them with supported hardware; as immediate compensating controls, remove from internet-facing positions, implement network segmentation, and restrict access to management interfaces.
- These are End-of-Life (EOL) GeoVision devices for which no vendor patch or fixed firmware version is publicly available.
- If these devices are still in operation, they should be retired and replaced with supported hardware from vendors that provide regular security updates.
- If immediate retirement is not possible, network segmentation should be applied to isolate these devices from untrusted networks.
- Implement additional firewall rules to restrict access to the affected devices to only trusted IP addresses.
- Monitor network traffic for signs of exploitation attempts.
- Consider implementing intrusion detection/prevention systems to detect command injection attempts.
- Document the risk acceptance if these devices must remain in service despite being EOL and vulnerable.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-6047 — 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-2024-6047 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