CVE-2024-9002
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 · uneditedCWE-269: Improper Privilege Management vulnerability exists that could cause unauthorized access, loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the workstation when non-admin authenticated user tries to perform privilege escalation by tampering with the binaries
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 confidenceCWE-269 Improper Privilege Management vulnerability allows authenticated non-admin users to escalate privileges by tampering with workstation binaries. This improper authorization allows modification of system executables that should be protected from user-level access, enabling privilege escalation to administrative levels.
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify current user context and privilegesRun 'whoami /all' on Windows or 'id' on Linux/Unix to determine if your current session is running as a non-administrator userAffected if You are logged in as an authenticated user without administrative privileges but can still access this system
-
Check write permissions on system binary directoriesOn Linux: 'ls -la /usr/bin /usr/local/bin /sbin /bin' to view permissions. On Windows: check ACLs on C:\Windows\System32 using 'icacls C:\Windows\System32\*.exe'Affected if Non-admin users have write (w) permissions on directories containing system executables
-
Verify file permissions on critical system executablesSelect a system binary (e.g., cmd.exe, powershell.exe on Windows; /bin/ls, /usr/bin/sudo on Linux) and check permissions with 'icacls <filename>' or 'ls -la <filename>'Affected if Non-admin users have write (W) or modify permissions on individual system executables
-
Test for unauthorized binary modification capabilityAs a non-admin user, attempt to create or modify a test file in the system binary directory to confirm write access existsAffected if Non-admin users can successfully create or modify files in protected system directories
-
Audit recent changes to system binariesUse file integrity monitoring tools or check file modification timestamps on key system executables to detect unexpected changesAffected if System binaries show modifications that were not authorized through proper administrative channels
Your environment is affected if authenticated non-administrator users have write access to system binary directories or individual system executables, enabling potential privilege escalation through binary tampering.
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 file system permissions to restrict write access to system binaries to administrators only; enable code signing verification and integrity checks for executables; apply principle of least privilege to all user accounts.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-9002 — 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-2024-9002 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