CVE-2024-6737
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 · uneditedThe access control in the Electronic Official Document Management System from 2100 TECHNOLOGY is not properly implemented, allowing remote attackers with regular privileges to access the account settings functionality and create an administrator account.
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 · moderate confidenceThe Electronic Official Document Management System from 2100 TECHNOLOGY has improper access control that allows authenticated regular users to access account settings functionality intended for administrators and create new administrator accounts, resulting in privilege escalation.
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< 5.0.77CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Check installed version of Electronic Official Document Management SystemLocate the application version in the system configuration, about page, or by querying the application's metadata (such as version file, database version table, or admin interface). Compare against the affected range: version < 5.0.77.Affected if The installed version is lower than 5.0.77.
-
Verify if account settings functionality is accessible to regular usersLog in as an authenticated regular (non-administrator) user and attempt to access the account settings or user management endpoints typically reserved for administrators. Observe if the application returns the administrative interface or allows navigation to privileged areas.Affected if A regular authenticated user can access administrative account settings without receiving an authorization error.
-
Test if regular users can create administrator accountsAs a regular user, attempt to use any user creation or registration functionality to create a new account with administrative privileges, or modify an existing account's role to administrator. Check if the request succeeds and the new admin account is functional.Affected if A regular user can successfully create an account with administrator-level privileges.
The environment is affected if the installed version is below 5.0.77 AND regular authenticated users can access administrative functions or create elevated accounts.
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 · scoped5.0.77
Implement proper role-based access control (RBAC) with server-side authorization checks to ensure regular users cannot access administrative functions or create privileged accounts.
5.0.77
- Upgrade Electronic Official Document Management System to version 5.0.77 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-6737 — 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-2024-6737 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