CVE-2024-6252
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 has been found in Zorlan SkyCaiji up to 2.8 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the component Task Handler. The manipulation of the argument onerror leads to cross site scripting. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-269419.
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 reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in Zorlan SkyCaiji up to version 2.8 within the Task Handler component. The vulnerability stems from insufficient sanitization of the 'onerror' argument, allowing remote attackers to inject malicious JavaScript that executes in victim browsers.
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<= 2.8CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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 SkyCaiji installationLocate the SkyCaiji application files on the server. Check for directories named 'skycaiji', 'SkyCaiji', or the main PHP/application files typically found in the web root.Affected if The SkyCaiji application is present on the server.
-
Determine SkyCaiji versionLocate and open the version file or changelog within the SkyCaiji installation directory. Common locations include a 'version.php', 'changelog.txt', or the main index/config file where the version number is defined.Affected if The installed version is 2.8 or any version lower than 2.8.
-
Verify Task Handler component is activeCheck if the Task Handler module is accessible via the web interface. Look for routes or endpoints related to task handling, often found under paths like '/task/', '/index.php/task/', or similar URL patterns in the application's routing configuration.Affected if The Task Handler component is enabled and accessible.
-
Inspect onerror parameter handlingLocate the Task Handler source code files and examine how the 'onerror' parameter is processed. Look for the specific PHP file handling the task functionality and check if the onerror parameter is used directly in output or error handling without sanitization functions like htmlspecialchars() or similar encoding.Affected if The onerror parameter is used in the code without proper input validation or output encoding.
A user is affected if SkyCaiji version 2.8 or lower is installed, the Task Handler component is active, and the onerror parameter is processed without sanitization in the Task Handler code.
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 dataImplement proper input validation and output encoding for the onerror parameter. Additionally, deploy Content-Security-Policy headers and HTTPOnly flags on session cookies to reduce XSS impact.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-6252 — 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-2024-6252 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