Uncontrolled Search Path (DLL Hijack)Weakness · CWE-427

CVE-2024-8299

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-11-28
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
Zero-click

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 · unedited
Uncontrolled Search Path Element vulnerability in Mitsubishi Electric GENESIS64 versions 10.97.3 and prior, Mitsubishi Electric ICONICS Suite versions 10.97.3 and prior, Mitsubishi Electric Hyper Historian versions 10.97.3 and prior, Mitsubishi Electric GENESIS32 all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MC Works64 all versions, Mitsubishi Electric Iconics Digital Solutions GENESIS64 versions 10.97.3 and prior, Mitsubishi Electric Iconics Digital Solutions ICONICS Suite versions 10.97.3 and prior, Mitsubishi Electric Iconics Digital Solutions Hyper Historian versions 10.97.3 and prior, and Mitsubishi Electric Iconics Digital Solutions GENESIS32 all versions allows a local authenticated attacker to execute a malicious code by storing a specially crafted DLL in a specific folder. This could lead to disclose, tamper with, destroy, or delete information in the affected products, or to cause a denial of service (DoS) condition on the products.

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 confidence

This is a DLL hijacking (uncontrolled search path element) vulnerability in multiple Mitsubishi Electric and Iconics industrial software products. A local authenticated attacker can place a malicious DLL in a specific folder that the application searches during runtime, causing the application to load the attacker's DLL instead of the legitimate one, leading to arbitrary code execution.

MitigationImplement secure DLL loading by using absolute paths for all DLL dependencies, removing the vulnerable folder from the search path, or applying vendor-supplied patches. Additionally, restrict file system permissions to prevent unauthorized users from writing to directories in the DLL search order.

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
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed Mitsubishi Electric or Iconics software
    Review installed programs on the system for any Mitsubishi Electric or Iconics industrial automation, HMI, SCADA, or runtime products. Check Program Files directories for product folders. Use 'Get-ItemProperty HKLM:\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\* | Select-Object DisplayName, DisplayVersion' or similar inventory tools.
    Affected if Any Mitsubishi Electric or Iconics industrial software product is installed and the DLL search path includes user-writable directories
  2. Examine DLL search path configuration
    For each identified product, locate the main executable (.exe) and check for associated .exe.config XML files or application manifests. Inspect whether the application uses safe DLL loading mode (LOAD_WITH_ALTERED_SEARCH_PATH not set, or SafeDllSearchMode enabled). Use Process Monitor or similar tool to observe DLL search paths during application startup.
    Affected if The application does not use absolute paths for DLL loading and searches user-writable directories first
  3. Check file system permissions on application directories
    Review write permissions on the application's base directory, subdirectories, and directories in the DLL search order. Use 'icacls <directory>' or equivalent to list ACLs. Identify directories where authenticated users can create or modify files.
    Affected if Any directory in the application's DLL search path (especially the application directory or System32) permits write access to low-privilege or authenticated users
  4. Detect suspicious DLLs in search path directories
    Scan application directories and common DLL search locations (application folder, working directory, System32, Windows, PATH directories) for unexpected or unsigned DLL files, particularly those with names matching commonly hijacked DLLs (e.g., version.dll, dbghelp.dll, bcrypt.dll). Compare against known legitimate DLL inventory.
    Affected if Unexpected DLL files exist in directories the application searches during runtime, especially if they are not digitally signed or are recently created
  5. Verify application runs with elevated privileges
    Check the service configuration or scheduled task settings for the identified products. Determine if the application runs as a privileged account (LocalSystem, Administrator) versus a standard user account. Use 'sc qc <service>' or Task Scheduler for service/task details.
    Affected if The vulnerable application runs with elevated privileges (LocalSystem/Administrator) while the DLL search path includes directories writable by standard users

A user is affected if they have any Mitsubishi Electric or Iconics industrial software installed and the application loads DLLs from directories writable by non-admin users, allowing potential code execution via DLL hijacking.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement secure DLL loading by using absolute paths for all DLL dependencies, removing the vulnerable folder from the search path, or applying vendor-supplied patches. Additionally, restrict file system permissions to prevent unauthorized users from writing to directories in the DLL search order.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-8299 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-8299 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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