CVE-2024-9597
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 Path Traversal vulnerability exists in the `/wipe_database` endpoint of parisneo/lollms version v12, allowing an attacker to delete any directory on the system. The vulnerability arises from improper validation of the `key` parameter, which is used to construct file paths. An attacker can exploit this by sending a specially crafted HTTP request to delete arbitrary directories.
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 path traversal vulnerability exists in the `/wipe_database` endpoint of parisneo/lollms v12 where the `key` parameter is not validated before being used to construct file paths, allowing attackers to traverse the filesystem and delete arbitrary directories.
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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 lollms versionRun 'pip show lollms' or check the installed package version using your package manager to confirm version 12.x is installedAffected if Version 12.x is installed and the /wipe_database endpoint is accessible
-
Locate the endpoint handlerSearch the lollms installation directory for the wipe_database route definition, typically in the web server or API route configuration filesAffected if The endpoint handler exists and does not contain input validation logic for the key parameter
-
Verify endpoint accessibilityAttempt to access the /wipe_database endpoint (e.g., via curl or browser) to confirm it is exposed without authentication or with weak authAffected if The endpoint responds without requiring strong authentication or authorization
-
Test key parameter for traversalSend a request to /wipe_database with a key value containing '../' sequences (e.g., key=../../etc) and observe if the application processes the path without rejecting itAffected if The application accepts directory traversal sequences in the key parameter without sanitization or rejection
-
Review request handling codeExamine the server-side code handling the wipe_database endpoint to verify whether the key parameter undergoes path normalization or allowlist validation before file operationsAffected if The code does not validate or normalize the key parameter before using it in file path operations
If lollms v12 is running with the /wipe_database endpoint exposed and the key parameter accepts traversal sequences without validation, the environment is affected by this CVE.
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 strict input validation on the `key` parameter to reject directory traversal sequences (../), use path normalization with allowlist checking, and ensure proper sanitization before constructing file paths.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-9597 — 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-2024-9597 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